home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky comp.sys.mac.programmer:20810 comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.tools:1896 comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.misc:4645
- Path: sparky!uunet!charon.amdahl.com!amdahl!xserver!alan
- From: alan@xserver.uts.amdahl.com (Alan Bomberger)
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer,comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.tools,comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.misc
- Subject: Re: Stallman and friends
- Message-ID: <c99K035xc7gF00@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com>
- Date: 6 Jan 93 17:31:08 GMT
- References: <D2150035.mrrnh5@outpost.SF-Bay.org> <1993Jan5.075021.970@shawn.uucp> <1993Jan05.231932.21087@eng.umd.edu>
- Sender: netnews@uts.amdahl.com
- Organization: Amdahl
- Lines: 23
-
- Gosh I hate to step into a political argument but I thought
- I was the only one who had trouble with FSF. They don't mind
- making money on software (you pay FSF to develop software) but
- they do make it impossible to distribute the cost of software
- development (once FSF delivers the software you paid them to
- develop you must give it away). This philosophy if followed
- by others would certainly stop speculative software development.
-
- Why would I pay FSF (or anyone else with the same philosophy)
- X thousand dollars to develop software and then have no way
- to recover my costs? Because it is good for society? I have
- heard these arguments before in other political and economic
- discussions. Who is paying for development of GCC? Why?
-
- Do you think there would be such excellent software in such
- large volumes for the Mac (or any other system) if there were
- no way for the developers of that software to make money? Semantec
- would give away SAM? I must be a capitalist or something.
-
- There! That ought to get the juices flowing!
-
- Peace
- --
-