We need to work towards a better way of developing and earning a living from software and it's development. The proprietary software business model is unsustainable in most situations. The company(s?) make way way way too much money for the amount of good that is provided to our society.
It's only software!
Why has it made some of the richest men in the world?
Because the operating system market in particular is unstable - it collapses onto one provider. There are several factors driving this:
- A commercial software house will generally release software for the dominant OS first, and only for other OS's if it gets round to it. In many, many cases, this means that software is never released for Mac and Linux. Many consumers choose Windows because of software availability, which feeds its dominance.
- Sharing of files between people tends to drive them towards one dominant application. This is the burden that OpenOffice must bear. I've never yet heard anyone complain that MS-Word is no good because it can't edit OpenOffice files. People are increasingly share documents in Word files rather than pdf, html, or plain text. This practice promotes Microsoft's monopoly.
- Anti-competitive practices by Microsoft have worked extremely well - first WordPerfect, then Netscape - Google next, perhaps.
Linux is the only hope of prising open Microsoft's grip on this unstable market, as it follows a completely different business model. If Linux can establish itself in the market, then there is some prospect for software houses other than Microsoft competing on an equal footing.
> Volker Kuhlmann wrote: >> I need >> a useable computing platform *now*, not in the distant utopia, and I >> don't think I'm a minority here. Of course I don't think there's >> anything wrong with ideals, but I prefer not to let them be in the way >> of reality.
So this is the "reality", like it or not. You can choose to support Microsoft, or you can choose to support Linux. To break the unstable cycle, Linux needs applications. The commercial software world is not (yet) interested in providing them. So to support Linux, we all need to support OSS applications, even when they're flakey. Especially when they're still flakey. It's not idealism. It's simple, harsh reality.
Zane wrote: > You are correct that open source is not producing speech recognition > software very well and that is not the only area of soft ware > development that is not very well "handled" by RMS's vision. > Games are another field. But that doesn't mean you throw the baby out > with the bathwater.
It's a shame about the games. But if Linux can get established in other major desktop areas, then the games will follow, as will the speech recognitiion. Gaming is a fashion industry, and consequently has a particularly high development to market-life ratio.
Steve Holdoway wrote:
Why should all this be done for free - if it takes 60 hours / week of your time, why shouldn't it be possible to make a living out of it - OSS or not?
It's not that people shouldn't be able to make a living out of software. It is only that the software market, and the OS market in particular, is unstable. The free market has failed us here, and will again. We need Linux. Linux needs applications. If it gets established properly, then the proprietary applications will follow, and you'll still be able to feed your family. No one is stopping you writing proprietary applications for Linux - it's just that the market isn't very big yet.
In the meantime, you can still support Microsoft's monopoly by writing proprietary applications for Windows.
======================================================================= This email, including any attachments, is only for the intended addressee. It is subject to copyright, is confidential and may be the subject of legal or other privilege, none of which is waived or lost by reason of this transmission. If the receiver is not the intended addressee, please accept our apologies, notify us by return, delete all copies and perform no other act on the email. Unfortunately, we cannot warrant that the email has not been altered or corrupted during transmission. =======================================================================
