Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!purdue!decwrl!decwrl!granite.pa.dec.com!mwm From: mwm@raven.pa.dec.com (Mike (Real Amigas have keyboard garages) Meyer) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: An issue for the entire Amiga Community. Message-ID: Date: 6 Jun 90 20:11:25 GMT References: <20930@snow-white.udel.EDU> <1990Jun3.163532.12083@ameristar> <1990Jun5.231451.422@ameristar> Sender: news@decwrl.dec.com Organization: Missionaria Phonibalonica Lines: 35 In article <1990Jun5.231451.422@ameristar> rick@ameristar (Rick Spanbauer) writes: >Remember, much of the PD work floating around is _not_ the result of >someone deciding they wanted to make money. It's the result of someone >saying "I need an X", and discovering that the X's available were >either inadequate or overpriced. So they write an X that's adequate ^^^^^^^^^^ Ah, you said the "O" word. Defend "overpriced", please. "Overpriced" means more than it's worth to me. That may be because I don't need 90% of the features, or because I'm a broke student who spent all his spare cash on the hardware, or because it's something I'd only use only use once in a blue moon. It's a personal call. If you read my earlier comments closely, you'll see that I confined my comments to HackerDudes reinventing commercially available products, mostly out of motivation that the commercial software "costs too much". Gee, all the things I mention mean that the commercial software "costs to much". Many of them look like valid reasons for wanting to create the tool yourself. It doesn't matter _why_ the software was written, you're still asking them to either invest much more effort in the software to make it commercial, or to not let anyone else use it. That's as offensive and unrealistic as asking that commercial software vendors cut their price to just a bit over the materials cost and start shipping with source.