Re: "Red Hat recommends Windows for consumers"
On Sat, 08 Nov 2003 10:28, Mike Mueller wrote:
> On Friday 07 November 2003 13:27, Ron Johnson wrote:
> > On Fri, 2003-11-07 at 11:45, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
> > > On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 11:01:58AM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
> > > > As in "proprietary, closed-source apps"?
> > > >
> > > > Well, that depends on if you see them as a "problem", or something
> > > > that you prefer not to use.
>
> <snip>
>
> > > Personally I haven't really made my mind up about prioprietry apps, and
> > > whether RMS is right or not. However, the success of Linux is widely
> > > attributed to the open-source development model, so I can't really see
> > > the future of Linux throwing it away.
> >
> > I'm all for the open-source development model. However, we must
> > respect that some companies want to keep their source closed, and
> > still sell to the Linux market.
>
> I'm fascinated with this question from a practical perspective.
>
> The RMS model works when producers can afford to present a gift or when a
> community organizes to accomplish a goal (barn-raising, for example).
>
> Let's say you're a barn builder. People need barns and are used to buying
> barns now-a-days. You go around to the community and suggest a community
> barn-raising project. Everyone agrees but you soon find out the
> participants are barn users and not barn builders. The community is more
> than happy to use the barn you give them for free if you'll do it for free.
> You talk to your family and they remind you that they'll starve if you
> build barns for free. So you offer to build barns for a price and you find
> that people are willing to buy the barns because they don't want to learn
> barn-building.
Your barn idea works fine in that mythical beast, a 'free market'. The
problem we are faced with, is that the biggest barn builder has managed to
run every other barn builder out of town and now has a monopoly on barns,
sells only one (patented) model that falls down after a few years and needs
replacement, and charges exorbitant prices for them. Nobody else can afford
to start a barn-building business because, one way or another, Mr Big will
buy them out, intimidate the lumber merchants not to sell to them, threaten
them with copyright lawsuits, or (if sufficiently pushed) drop the prices on
his barns just until they are forced out of business.
Maybe the only way to break the bastard is for enough prospective barn owners
to get together and start co-operatively building barns.
cr
Reply to: