In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, A.M. Kuchling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >On Thursday, July 3, 2003, at 06:43 AM, Bernard Hill wrote: >> So what encourages the developer to develop code if there is no payment >> to the developer? > >Why are there amateur musicians who perform without being paid for it?
Because they have other jobs. Why are there no professional musicians who perform without being paid for it? > >* Playing music is fun, payment or not. It can be quite tedious at times, for professionals... >* They want to compose their own music that they'll like better than >existing compositions. >* They want to perform with their friends. >* Or, they want to perform *for* their friends. >* Members of the appropriate sex like musicians. > >So, similarly with programming: > >* Programming is fun. Not when you do it for a living. >* Existing programs may not do what I want, so I'll write my own. >* Collaborating with other programmers is fun. >* Since I've written the code, why not give it away in case someone >else finds it useful? >* Here the analogy suddenly breaks down. I'm not an amateur: I live 100% on my programming skills (and marketing and customer support and office cleaning and and and) Music Publisher would not exist if I did not get income from it. It is my *sole* source of income - I am not retired, I do not get a pension, or any allowance or have any other job at all. This is my life. If I give it away I stop developing it because I have to go back to work. Isn't this completely obvious? Bernard Hill Braeburn Software Author of Music Publisher system Music Software written by musicians for musicians http://www.braeburn.co.uk Selkirk, Scotland To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
