Hello too, There is also the view looking at what the proprietry system has done to software development.
ie., If all source code is kept closed then only the proprietry owners access and evolve that app or whatever it may be. Talented willing hackers get no chance to improve on it - oportunity to make better apps is denied in furtherance of one profit centre. BUT where an app is developed open source it is more likely to be better developed and eventually compete with the worse quality closed source proprietry app. The proper maintenace of a public domain of source code builds better code and better code builds better business. Nice thought anyway. If you want to arm yourself with something try reading Lawrence Lessig's new Book The Future of Ideas. Easy read and goes into the Economic theory of open source qute well I reckon. Raena > Subject: [SLUG] GPL, an argument . > Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 01:12:37 +1100 (EST) > From: Jean-Francois Dive <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Hi all, > > After a long discussion with someone about the GPL and the open source > model of business, he raised a point which i cant find any very valid > argument, maybe you guys will be able to gimme your point on this: > > The idea is that developping free sofware leads the author to it's own > professional death: if the opensource movement works to it's extreme > extend, what will happens to the company that sell whatever proprietary > sofware ? It's faith is death or recycling. As most of the opensource > developpers are professionals, this directly leads them to a no job > future. The extended idea he raises is that developping an opensource > software simply cut any value of the work we do. > > My point of view is that the business model of a simple software > engineering company will have to move towards service integration and > consultancy, but this is true that in a way this movement may lead a major > change in the industry. > > JeF > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Subject: Re: [SLUG] GPL, an argument . > Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 01:13:09 +1100 > From: "Steven Blunt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Hi all, > > > > After a long discussion with someone about the GPL and the open source > > model of business, he raised a point which i cant find any very valid > > argument, maybe you guys will be able to gimme your point on this: > > > > The idea is that developping free sofware leads the author to it's own > > professional death: if the opensource movement works to it's extreme > > extend, what will happens to the company that sell whatever proprietary > > sofware ? It's faith is death or recycling. As most of the opensource > > developpers are professionals, this directly leads them to a no job > > future. The extended idea he raises is that developping an opensource > > software simply cut any value of the work we do. > > > > My point of view is that the business model of a simple software > > engineering company will have to move towards service integration and > > consultancy, but this is true that in a way this movement may lead a major > > change in the industry. > > RMS has an article on this somewhere, but the basic idea is that the > majority of programmers are not employed creating retail proprietary > software (ie for companies like MS), they are employed in things like > service intergration/consultancy and supporting in house applications. > > Open source would lead to more of these programmers, not less, since > companies are able to rely on their own programmers to support Linux rather > than relying on MSs programmers to support Windows. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
begin:vcard n:Lea-Shannon;Raena x-mozilla-html:FALSE adr:;;;;;; version:2.1 email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] note;quoted-printable:"Innovation makes enemies of all those who prospered under the old regime..."=0D=0AMachiavelli, The Prince x-mozilla-cpt:;736 fn:Raena Lea-Shannon end:vcard
