99% of in-house software that I've seen addresses specific business needs within the local business environment. I don't see any benefit to cooperating/organizing this type of software development.
Jim > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tim Fournet > Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2003 9:57 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [brlug-general] free, closed and practical software. > > > Ransom is good. It allows the potential users of the software > to not have to cooperate. > > I read somewhere that the majority of software, at least 80% > IIRC, is written for in-house use. A lot of this is software > that could be shared in terms of both use and development, > saving money for everyone who wants to use it, and improving > the quality. If more people would open source their software > and share the changes they make to it, a lot of work would > not have to be repeated. All software in general could be at > a higher level by now if this had been going on more already.. > > -Tim > > > On Tue, 2003-07-08 at 09:32, John Hebert wrote: > > The answer is the Ransom model. > > > > Look at how the source code for Blender was paid for and released: > > > > http://www.blender.org/bf/ > > > > Though you may have to dig for the historical methods. > > > > John Hebert > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Dustin Puryear > > To: [email protected] > > Sent: 7/8/03 7:46 AM > > Subject: Re: [brlug-general] free, closed and practical software. > > > > At 02:30 PM 7/7/2003 -0500, you wrote: > > > > With this model the cost of the project is very high for a small > > group of > > > > people, whereas if you can spread the cost of > development across > > > > the > > > > > entire > > > > market the cost per-person is greatly reduced. This is basic > > economics. > > > > ... > > > > > > > > How can open source developers use this principle to their > > advantage? > > > > > > > > > >The biggest advantage to free software today is the large > code base. > > >A > > > > >company like Spyglass may have to start from scratch or > close to it, > > but a > > >free software developer has much of the groundwork covered. Costs > > >for > > >mundane applications are eliminated. If someone wants a > text editor, > > you > > >simply figure out which one they would most like. Complicated > > >projects > > > > >can be broken down into a series of mundane ones and > strung together > > with > > >a unique chunk. > > > > This has been done since the 70's. > > > > >If I were trying to do things the Microsoft way, I'd have to find > > owners > > >of software like I want and pay them all a fee or purchase > them or do > > it > > >from scratch. My costs would be much higher and I'd be subject to > > >the > > >whims of those owners. > > > > > >As a free developer, I can put the system together at no > cost besides > > my > > >time. If what I put together was worth using, I could get paid to > > >put > > it > > >in place. What I charge would be mostly for hardware used and > > development > > >time. Sure, others would > > > > Exactly! > > > > So someone pays for your development time. Who? A single > client? If it > > takes you or a team of developers several months or more to develop > > software that could conceivable be mass-marketed then there is an > > inefficiency here. A single client is paying for something > that a larger > > > > base of clients would be willing to pay for. > > > > So how do we solve this problem? > > > > This question just keeps coming up. Everyone keeps trying > to argue the > > merits of open source software. That's not my question. > > > > > > --- > > Dustin Puryear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Puryear Information Technology, LLC <http://www.puryear-it.com> > > Providing expertise in the management, integration, and security of > > Windows and UNIX systems, networks, and applications. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > General mailing list > > [email protected] > http://brlug.net/mailman/listinfo/general_brlu> g.net > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > General mailing list > > [email protected] > http://brlug.net/mailman/listinfo/general_brlu> g.net > > > > _______________________________________________ > > General mailing list > [email protected] http://brlug.net/mailman/listinfo/general_brlug.net >
