Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.questions
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!spool.mu.edu!sdd.hp.com!col.hp.com!csn!cns!mass
From: mass@cscns.com (Mike Jones/Mountain Alternative Systems)
Subject: The free software myth and the commerical myth
Message-ID: <C75LC8.LxB@cscns.com>
Summary: Discussion of free vs. commercial software
Keywords: free commercial software debate flames
Sender: news@cscns.com (News)
Nntp-Posting-Host: cns
Organization: Community_News_Service
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]
Date: Mon, 17 May 1993 04:19:20 GMT
Lines: 154
THE MYTH OF FREE SOFTWARE AND THE MYTH OF THE COMMERCIAL GOD
Background
Some individuals of the Linux community seem to be very sensitive about
the issue of free software. Others are sympathetic to the commercial cause.
Some, like myself, are somewhere in the middle. I gage this general feeling of
mine from responses about my writing commercial programs for Linux or providing
support. After putting some thought into the idea of free software vs.
commercial software, I am starting to wonder if the framework of the
discussion is all wrong.
Purpose
The purpose of the following discussion is to try to create a better
framework for the discussion of free vs. commercial. The following discussion
in no way to endorses any given system, but instead to tries to discover the
strengths and weakness of each system and provide a better framework for
discussion. Hopefully, the new framework will allow people on both sides to
cooperate and work together, utilizing our energies to solve problems rather
than work against each other.
The myth of free software
The idea of free software is a misnomer in the sense that nothing can
really be free. One may not pay for the software with money, but may very
well pay with time, effort, or by helping other people. Even if you can
use the software with little effort and choose not to help others, the very
fact that you use the system makes you somewhat dependent on it. That
dependency itself may cost you. Technology in general first enables you,
then makes you it's slave. What business in the modern world can survive
without computers?
Several years ago I worked for a Atomatic Test Equipment (ATE) vendor.
We were competing against another company that offered to place a tester
at the customers site for a free six months evaluation. If the customer was
unhappy, they could return it and not pay a dime. Well, after six months
they were using the tester in production and had to buy it or risk not making
customer shipments. They could not convert to a different tester fast enough
to return the free one. The point is not that they could not change systems.
The point is that the supposed free system cost them money. If they kept it,
they had to pay. If they returned it, they paid with missed shipments.
I think in our case, Linux and GNU copyrighted software, restricted or
unrestricted might be better terms. Under the copyrights you can not restrict
the distribution of the software. In commercially copyrighted software you can
not distribute it with out permission. The theory behind the copyright law
is to allow the author to reap the benifits of his work for a period of time.
The copyright also protects the public by limiting the duration of the
copyright.
The myth of the commercial God
The western world, and particularly the US, has slowly brainwashed
itself into beliving that the capitalist system will save us. My personal
view is that it is only a system. If it serves the general welfare of the
people, it is a good system. If it does not, it is a bad system. I would
evaluate any economic system this way. But it seems that people have so
bought into the capitalist/commercial system, that they think it will solve
all their problems. Look at modern advertising. If you have this car you
will have women. Smoke this brand of cigarettes and you will be cool, etc.
We think that something has no value if it does not cost money.
The asset of unrestricted software
The primary asset of the unrestricted (free) software idea is that it
tends to be a charitable system. If a developing nation has no currency
for software, it can use this software. The same applies to a college student
who has a limited budget. It would be difficult to find a commercial vendor
willing to part with their software to those who can't pay money! And when
they do, they are calculating how they will reap a reward from their
charity in the future. Look at free computers in schools! Unrestricted
software writers can not be praised enough for their contributions!
The problems of unrestricted software
It is tempting to say that the major problem is quality. However,
after using the Linux system for a while, I find the quality very good.
So, if the problem is not quality what is it? Two things. First, stability.
The system changes fast is is difficult to keep up with. You have to be a
genius and a gorilla to keep up with all the goings on about Linux.
Second, there is no guarantee of getting help when you need it. Just last
week there was a news posting begging for help a third time. People are
irritated when someone askes a question that was answered in a FAQ. This
intimidates the novices real quick. There is also no single place to go
for answers with any assurance you will get an answer when you need it. You
are depentent on the good will of others for help.
The value of commercial software
The relationship between the consumer and the producer is better
defined. What you get and what you pay is better defined. If you have
agreed to support, you can expect to get it. You also have recorse in
court if one party does not live up to the agreement. It can be difficult
to run a business if you have a computer system with support one day but
not the next. One can not tell their customer that the computer is down
and no one will help you that day, or that you don't know when someone will.
The problems of commercial software
The software comes as is and you can't change it. This tends to make
buying software like shopping for clothes. You try them on and if they fit
you buy them. You may never find exactly what you want, and most stores
will think you are crazy if you expect them to make any alterations. This is
the mentality of the widget maker. Granted, you can achive a high level of
quality this way. Look a cars for example. But if one is able, why not
have the ability to modify it so it suits your needs better?
General conclusions
Each system, commercial or unrestricted (free), has its own strengths
and weaknesses. Arguments that one system is better than the other are
fruitless. Is it not possible for both systems to co-exist and complement
each other?
Linux in particular
Even though these two systems can co-exist, it may be neccessary
to establish some general agreement as to where each system participates
in producing software. It may not be suitable for commercial companies
to develop software integral to the kernel. This might cause a splintering
effect of parallel development. Once the kernel has restricted object code,
development will become difficult outside the commercial company. This would
surely cause their to be two kernels. However, both systems could produce
applications. The only problem here might be if commercial companies
distributed a whole Linux system with their application. There seems
to be a lot of gray area here.
Future discussion
I would like to see some discussion about where boundries should be
drawn between unrestricted software development and commercial development.
I would also like to see some discussion about how the two systems can
compliment each other rather than work against each other.
Mike Jones
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
/\
/ \/\ The sense of the miracle of humanity
Mountain Alternative Systems / / \ itself should be always more vivid to
mass@cscns.com / / \ us than any marvels of power,
/ / \ intellect, art, or civilization.
/ / \
G.K. Chesterton