It has to be noted that the people who published the Bible at great risk to
their lives in the 14th and 15th century made a ton of money off it.
At 09:41 AM 5/3/01, you wrote:
>Joseph Dal Molin wrote:
>
>
>>http://www.nytimes.com/2001/05/03/technology/03SOFT.html
>>The New York times article give a taste of what's to come as well as an
>>short reaction from IBM.....
>
>Warning, you need an account (free I think, but yet another multi-step
>form fill out) to read.
>
>>
>>So.....on this note what do the folks on this list think the most
>>significant arguements against open source still are?
>
>The most significant criticism I know about is that open source
>development process's do not always create well understood software
>engineering processes.
>
>There is another economic argument that I think is the crux of MS
>argument, mainly that open source discourgaes innovation by preventing
>creators from exploiting their creations for personal purposes (usually
>wealth accumulation). I maintain this is a matter of personal choice, but
>there is a societal argument here.
>
> This argument then leads into whether there are viable commericial
> economic models for keeping an open source software product supported.
