Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!usc!snorkelwacker!bloom-beacon!SHAMASH.MCRCIM.MCGILL.EDU!mouse
From: mouse@SHAMASH.MCRCIM.MCGILL.EDU (der Mouse)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x
Subject: Re: Motif -> Open Look look & feel
Message-ID: <9007062359.AA01925@shamash.McRCIM.McGill.EDU>
Date: 6 Jul 90 23:59:46 GMT
Sender: daemon@athena.mit.edu (Mr Background)
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 59

> People who advocate free software have NO idea how critical quality
> is!

...to whom?  (Yes, I know you implicitly said, but you're missing the
point.)  Quality is *not* critical - to me.  Or to lots of other
people.

And on another point, *what* quality?  We are running an operating
system here which is allegedly vendor-supported and presumably has the
"quality" you're talking about.  I've found at least as many bugs in it
as I have in X, and with X, I can *fix* the bugs.  On the spot.  If you
add in the cost of a service contract guaranteeing the sort of response
time possible to someone with all the source right there, it's out of
reach even for many of the "large" buyers.  (I once had occasion to do
a little consulting for a "large buyer", whose name I won't give here,
and we had access to the vendor support people, so I have some idea
what I'm talking about when I say that.)

> No!  There are NO exceptions to the rule!  GNU emacs, from a
> company's perspective is NOT a viable answer; as good as it is for
> hackers.  When I get a tape from FSF, it comes with NO guarantees.
> Well, that is the whole point; a company wants packages which come
> with guarantees.  When free software comes with 7x24 software support
> and guarantees, then I will alter my position on this issue.

Let me quote a bit from the license agreement for Turbo C.

		L I M I T E D   W A R R A N T Y

	With respect to the physical diskette and physical
	documentation enclosed herein, Borland International Inc.
	("Borland") warrants the same to be free of defects in
	materials and workmanship for a period of 60 days from the date
	of purchase.  [stuff about how to claim against the previous
	sentence's promises.]

	Borland International, Inc. specifically disclaims all other
	warranties, expressed or implied, including but not limited to
	implied warranties of merchantability and fitness for a
	particular purpose [...].

If someone can produce evidence that this is atypical, you may have a
point.  But otherwise, I think your argument founders on the facts:
nobody guarantees software, not even the commercial stuff.  As for
support, I've had a couple of occasions to contact vendor support at
various companies.  None of them compares to what I see for X simply by
posting to xpert/comp.windows.x.

>> I personally don't take as much stock in the
>> consistency-across-applications argument as do some.
> That is definitely the wrong attitude.  Look and feel across
> applications is EXTREMELY important.

Again - to whom?  To you?  To your company?  Certainly not to me.

					der Mouse

			old: mcgill-vision!mouse
			new: mouse@larry.mcrcim.mcgill.edu