Robert Brockway wrote:
On Thu, 17 Nov 2005, ness wrote:
Hi,
This day I had a really enervating discussion about free software with
my mother. Finally I got her to claim the following statements:
o One cannot make money with free software
As others have noted most of the money currently being made around free
software is through service delivery. I strongly suspect models for
making money from software exist that haven't even been thought of yet.
Linux has been putting food on my table for many years. My company has
been profitable since day one. Ever job we've had has been exclusively
or almost exclusively concerned with free software. The assertion above
is false. QED.
Nice one.
o Free software cannot provide (data) security
The word "cannot" is very strong. Open source apps _do_ provide data
security. If she wants to claim OpenSSH doesn't provide data security
she better have some pretty good arguments ready :)
What really makes the conversation hard with her is that I can't give an
example like, that, as she doesn't even has an idea of what it is. And
she's not really interested learning it.
If she meant that free/open source apps are not as good at providing
data security, well people have been arguing back and forth on that for
a long time. Opening the source allows the good guys and bad guys to
checkout the source. Since it only takes one good guy seeing a problem
to alert me (and those who will fix the hole) I judge open source to be
benefical to security on my systems.
She also called called it fraud if a company sells support for a free
program.
I always try to show respect to people's mothers but I have to say this
is absurd. Fraud is "intentional deception for personal gain". Where
is the deception if a company makes an agreement and does exactly what
it says it will do?
Support can be provided for anything the buyer and seller agree to. A
support agreement is just recognition that the buyer needs external
assistance. Providing support for free software is no different from
providing support for closed source software or shovelling snow.
Claiming it's fraud makes no sense to me at all.
Well, to me, too. Maybye one can explain this, she argumented as follows:
The company creates software. It is free, so everyone can use it (she
doesn't think about forking as she only thinks about end users). The
company makes all money by selled support. Now she sais: the company has
to be pretty sure the support is needed, so they should sell software
and support and not hide behind the floss image.
Oh, and she doesn't believe you get money for building coyotos, Jonathan.
It's been my experience that some people don't understand change. It's
also been my experience that they are the ones who are worse off in the
long run, not the ones who understand change.
Rob
--
-ness-
_______________________________________________
L4-hurd mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/l4-hurd
