Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!usc!wuarchive!uunet!decwrl!looking!brad
From: brad@looking.on.ca (Brad Templeton)
Newsgroups: trial.misc.legal.software
Subject: Re: Capitalist Software Tools
Message-ID: <1990Aug15.214922.18005@looking.on.ca>
Date: 15 Aug 90 21:49:22 GMT
References: <80565@aerospace.AERO.ORG> <1990Aug10.043721.2081@looking.on.ca> <80636@aerospace.AERO.ORG> <1990Aug11.040632.21692@looking.on.ca> <80817@aerospace.AERO.ORG> <1990Aug14.172413.10447@looking.on.ca> <GUMBY.90Aug14144505@Cygnus.COM> <JIM.90Aug14184448@bar <J
Organization: Looking Glass Software Ltd.
Lines: 33

Actually, one thing that I think will be very interesting in the future
is the concept of the free clone.

Nobody has really done it yet, but some day it will happen, either from the
GNU project or elsewhere.  A drop-in, fully compatible software clone that is
free.

Now it won't wipe out the maker of the original, but neither will it go away.
The middle ground is hard to predict.

Actually, many interesting factors come into play.  For example, what about
deliberate corproate sabotage?

What if Microsoft (hypothetical example, I do not imply MS would do this)
were to make a *really good* 1-2-3 clone, and then release it as freeware.
And push it -- include it free with every DOS or Windows etc.  Free with
Excel, too.

That could do *serious*, perhaps crippling damage to Lotus, establishing
MS as the big contender in software.  It would hurt Excel, but not the
way that it would hurt 1-2-3.

Would this be an anti-trust violation, perhaps?  The anti-trust laws stop
people from deliberately giving away stuff to kill the competition -- might
that apply to software?

I actually think a company should get some protection from this.

And I do understand what has been said about frustration in changing
interfaces.  The answer is to get people to standardize -- willingly.
They *will* do it if they are smart.
-- 
Brad Templeton, ClariNet Communications Corp. -- Waterloo, Ontario 519/884-7473