Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site watcgl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!watcgl!jchapman
From: jchapman@watcgl.UUCP (john chapman)
Newsgroups: net.micro
Subject: Re: The GNU Manifesto - let the people decide
Message-ID: <1620@watcgl.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 2-Apr-85 10:04:34 EST
Article-I.D.: watcgl.1620
Posted: Tue Apr  2 10:04:34 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 3-Apr-85 00:54:22 EST
References: <4536@ucla-cs.ARPA> <258@looking.UUCP>
Organization: U of Waterloo, Ontario
Lines: 95


 Brad Templeton writes:
> Indeed, let the people decide about GNU.  I don't say it's certain
> that GNU will not do good.  It could very well.  But I made my statements
> in the light of some important facts. 
> 
> The most important is that most people, unlike Richard Stallman, want
> good rewards for what they do.  While it may be very nice of Mr. Stallman
> and his friends to give us all this software, they certainly can't handle
> everything.

  There are an awful lot of people running bbs's at their own expense -
  no reward financially (in fact it costs them money), just performing
  a public service - these systems contain an awful lot of free
  software as does usenet.  If people get software they want for free
  from others they are also quite likely to distribute some of their
  own free as well.
> 
> Sadly, in a market where there is a high quality, high priced product and
> an inferior free product, many will use the free product not because it
> is the BEST but because it is free.  And thus you get the advancement of
> inferior products at the expense of superior ones.  Of course, this is
> from a purely technical viewpoint, as you might argue that the free product
> is "superior" in the long run due to the low cost.  I know the above rule
> from personal experience.  I have a $50 programming utility on the market.
> There is a free one, modeled after mine, which the author admits is clearly
> inferior.  Yet I lose many sales to it and piracy, the result being that
> I've moved on to other things.
> 
  This does not seem any different to me than someone deciding between
  the features of a $150 item and a $200 item - you look at what you
  get for the extra $50 and decide if it is worth it.  Apparently most
  people thought your program wasn't worth $50 for it's extra features;
  this is hardly a reason to decry the spread of free software.

> Perhaps RMS can make a superior product, and still keep it free.  Good
> luck, It's never been done before although it has often been tried.
> The reason for this is simple.  Designing and bringing up neat new software
> is fun, and lots of people are willing to do it for free.  Debugging,
> maintaining, enhancing and supporting it is NOT, and few will do this
> at the same bargain price.  Unfortunately, in a quality product, the first
> part takes up 90% of the time, and the other part takes up the other 90% of
> the time, to bring out the old cliche.  But who knows, perhaps they can do
> it, and time will tell.

  Two points: 
  1. as pointed out in the "manifesto" if there is demand (and there most
     likely will be) for support & enhancements then companies will
     spring up to provide this.  Perhaps you should volunteer to help
     him with the project thus becoming a gnu wizard, you would then be
     able to open a nice profitable business offering gnu support services.
  2. craftsmen who produce products to be given away generally put a lot
     of effort into what they produce - they have pride in it; on the
     other hand business writes software to make $$, it doesn't have to
     be good it just has to sell - if you find a bug and it only affects
     a small percentage of the potential customers you're not likely to
     see it fixed quickly (if at all).
> 
> I am not opposed to any quality product, free or not.  What I don't like
> is inferior products that displace superior products because they were
> written by fanatical communists like RMS.  (I'm not name calling, I use
> these terms as an accurate description based on my mail conversations with
> the man.)

 It is really unlikely that an inferior product will replace a superior
 product unless the "superior" product is overpriced (or perhaps not
 considered really superior in the eyes of the purchaser).  Since I
 don't know what your mail conversations have been like I don't know
 if RMS is a communist or not but it certainly does sound like you are
 name calling - whether he is a communist or not you are certainly
 using it as a perjorative.  Perhaps from now on you should be referred
 to as a fanatical capitalist....
> 
> And remember, the "quality" of a product must be judged over a period of
> time.  It may be good to start, but will it stand up?  Does it adapt and
> suit your needs for a long time?  Will people hang onto it long after it
> is obsolete just because it is free?

  It seems  to me that they would be more likley to hang on to obsolete
  software if they had paid a lot for it than if it was free. In the
  event that you are correct though: 
   I suggest we institute a corp of software police (to protect
  all those poor misguided users out there of course).  They can perform
  surprise searchs and if they find someone using outdated software they
  will confiscate it and force the hapless user to buy new shiny and
  expensive software to replace it (maybe you could make a deal with
  them?).
> -- 
> Brad Templeton, Looking Glass Software Ltd. - Waterloo, Ontario

 John Chapman

Disclaimer: the above is not the view of my employer, friends, family
            dog, myself, anyone known to me (living or dead) nor that
            of any fictional character in book I have ever read.