[geeks] And The Linux Weenies Wonder Why They Aren't Mainstream...`

[der Mouse]

> Paying someone to fix their software is not practical for an end
> user.

Cygnus built a successful business around disagreeing with that.

> The problem with the "this is free, so we don't have to fix it
> attitude" is that it is completely false.

Actually, it's entirely true (well, except for the causal link implied
by the "so").  But you don't have to use it, either.

> Also, the whole idea that this software is free is a complete lie.
> Someone, somewhere, had to pay for it.  If they aren't starving, then
> their "free" work is really subsidized by whoever pays them.

Not always.  Sometimes it's subsidized by the author's choice of
leisure-time activity.  (I don't consider one's leisure-time activities
to be subsidized by one's employer.)

But there's also the point that "free" has two meanings, and one of
them has nothing to do with money.  Libre versus gratuit, to use the
French terms (French does draw a distinction between the two).  I've
also seen the difference called as-in-beer vs as-in-speech, but that
brings in the whole mass of complications and associations of the
phrase "free speech", which are only slightly applicable and thus just
muddy the waters, so I prefer to avoid that phrasing.

>>    Free software: the developer may fix your problem will free.
>>       Offer money, and he'll almost certainly fix it.
> Sorry, but this is rarely ever true.

My experience disagrees.  I suspect this is largely a matter of which
OSS projects you look at (and want things fixed in).

/~\ The ASCII				der Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
 X  Against HTML	       mouse at rodents.montreal.qc.ca
/ \ Email!	     7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39  4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B