On Wed, 2014-02-12 at 00:13 -0600, Jack Coats wrote: > Yes, sell hardware, support and installation services, books, classes > is all fine, but they are comparatively 'high touch' sources of income > where the software licensing approach is much 'lower touch' and scales > if you have a product the public 'must have'.
Where 'high touch' means 'getting paid for doing actual work' and 'lower touch' means 'getting paid for sitting on your arse' Sure, "low touch" is more capitalist. But it isn't honest. We must face facts when it comes to the mechanical nature of software and mathematics. It is not possible to effectively* proprietarise software without escalating maintenance and advancement costs and reduced customer freedom, ownership and in the end satisfaction. There are two stands of resistance to Free and Open Source. One is the loss-aversion from developers and investors who are not willing to share (and thus work out their true business model). This is a psychological disorder which can be overcome with a bit of introspection. The other is actually from the FOSS side. Developers who believe money should never be involved with software development and hinder the progress of Free Software development as an industry force through their misplaced politics. Martin Owens * Effective in the long term, obviously any industry can cut and run with a bunch of bullshat. _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss