Re: Modified Rapture<g>, and a new question
On Mon 04 Apr 2016 at 02:22:10 (+0000), Mark Fletcher wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Apr 2016 at 04:20, David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> wrote:
> > On Sun 03 Apr 2016 at 08:56:23 (+0000), Mark Fletcher wrote:
> > > I just don't understand why anyone would pay money for Jessie in the first
> > > place.
> >
> > Convenience, bandwidth, trust,...
> >
> > > It's supposed to be free software...
> >
> > It *is* free software. That doesn't mean that vendors have to download
> > it, burn it, verify it, market it, distribute it, support it and pay
> > for all the overheads for nothing. There's no business model in that.
> Precisely. That was my question. Why would anyone do any of that?
Eh? "Anyone" in your first question referred to purchasers who pay
money for something that is free. OK, you obviously want the quick
answer. Read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gratis_versus_libre and
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_terms_for_free_software
and realise there's no contradiction in paying for free software.
"Anyone" in your second question refers to the vendors who do any or
all of that, and charge you for it.
> Just
> download it from Debian.org already. Separate vendors aren't adding any
> value. Why should they get paid for doing nothing useful?
That's your opinion. Fortunately for the purchasers, the vendors do
something that the purchasers consider useful, and they get paid for
doing so.
Bandwidth doesn't come free, so you pay for your download instead of
buying the media. You either pay your ISP directly, or indirectly
through council/property taxes (in a library), the bill (in a
restaurant), or your employer's overheads (at work).
Cheers,
David.
Reply to: