Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!att!pacbell!pacbell.com!ames!apple!netcom!mcmahan
From: mcmahan@netcom.UUCP (Dave Mc Mahan)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: An issue for the entire Amiga Community.
Message-ID: <12793@netcom.UUCP>
Date: 4 Jun 90 02:38:51 GMT
References: <1990Jun3.163532.12083@ameristar> <12779@netcom.UUCP> <1990Jun3.233558.12937@ameristar>
Organization: Dave McMahan @ NetCom Services
Lines: 93


 In a previous article, rick@ameristar (Rick Spanbauer) writes:
>
>	When I use PD, it is in this sense:  PD != Commercially sold, supported.

Yes, this is one of the caveats of PD.  Support is not part of the deal,
usually.  There are some rare exceptions.

>
>	Cars are hard goods that have non zero duplication costs.  To the
>	extent of materials costs, etc the Japanese are on the same footing
>	as Detroit.  The same cannot be said of "PD" software versus commercial
>	suppliers.  Several commercial suppliers competing in a stronger market
>	is good for all of us.  One or more commercial guys competing against
>	several PD dudes in a weak market isn't helping the any of the players
>	or their user community.

Yes, cars are not good examples.  I'm not sure if there is a good equivelent
to the PD software market vs. Commercial.  Software is unique among goods in
that it costs big bux to make the first copy, and 49 cents for the disk to
make the second copy.  Users have to know little else than how to use a 'copy'
command to make a perfect version.  Even a motivated mechanic couldn't
duplicate a car without parts.  About the only other semi-equivalent markets
I can think of is music writing or book writing.  A xerox machine is all that
is needed to obtain something.  There aren't too many PD composers out in
the world, though.  And they don't have the benefit of net.distribution or
fish disks.


>	Because Joe HackerDude may find himself at some point needing
>	Carl CommercialDude.  I buy from the guy up the street who makes 
>	Mexican Food every now and then just to help ensure he is there when 
>	I don't feel like rolling my own.  Joe HackerDude can find other 
>	things to get his thrills rather than to reinvent the wheel that the 
>	commercial guy is selling.  Especially so when the motivation is that 
>	the commercial guys charges too much.

Yes, there are benefits to the full service approach.  I normally buy any
commercial software I use via mailorder due to cost, but I was VERY thankful
when I blew up a CIA chip in my amiga to be able to go to the local amiga
dealer and buy one.  Addressing your point about Mr. HackerDude getting his
thrills, part of the motivation to doing PD is that the commercial equal just
doesn't do all it should or has bugs in it.  He may be re-inventing the wheel,
but his goal might be to make it a little rounder or provide a better ride.
If the Carl CommercialDude doesn't have the resources, time, or motivation
to improve his product, then the market will decide between the original
commercial version or the new and improved PD version.  The market will almost
always choose the less expensive product when all other features are identical.
What is the price point for 'charging too much'?  For every product and user,
this value changes.


>	My particular beef along these lines is the GCC hackers who are
>	threatening to drag me into the compiler support business through their
>	actions.  My thing is to produce systems solutions for the Amiga, eg
>	I used to do tcp/ip networking, and the last thing I want to do is spend
>	my time fixing GCC if Manx or Lattice was forced from the market by 
>	freeware (I did a GCC port myself > a year ago but for personal thrills
>	but sat on it out of respect for the commercial guys).  Imagine the
>	irony of using a commercial compiler product to build a GCC port....

I do not know of a company with a superior product that has folded due to
PD competition.  You may be forced into the compiler support business, but
I doubt it.  The GCC port may cause Manx and Lattice to solidify there latest
compiler releases, though.  This would be for the good.  One thing the GCC
port (and Matt Dillon's DICE software) would do is allow the bright young
student to have access to tools that s/he may otherwise not be able to afford.
I have never heard of anyone in the last 20 years hand assembling code so as
to avoid using an earlier computer system.  That's one of the benefits of the
software industry.  One can choose to use tools created previously to promote
the state of the art.


>	I would like to add that there are days when I pretty much buy
>	the Stallman theory of free software.  Maybe it is true that
>	computing would benefit from having everything available for the
>	asking.  The question is what you software types will do for a
>	living to support all those midnight PD production cycles?  Work
>	at McDonalds?  Ain't my idea of living!

I'll keep trying to live by my wits to provide the type of lifestyle I want
to have.  Stallman has some appealling ideas, but I prefer to get paid for
the code I develop.  Of course, the stuff I write is usually the type of
software that's not too applicable to anyone without a 34 meter Radio-telescope
or a high speed digital ground station to support it, so I guess it wouldn't
really be applicable for the masses.   :-)
If software hackers choose to sell shoes or work at McDonald's to support his
creative efforts at night, I applaud his effort.  That doesn't mean I would
choose that mode for myself.

>                  Rick Spanbauer

   -dave