At 01:46 PM 7/9/2003 -0500, you wrote: >OK, now I'm warmed up to the subject. > >Free software developers support themselves. They might do this by >working directly for a company that wants an application, they might need >the software to help with unrelated tasks or they might cut grass and >develop for fun. People who are not in a stable financial situation can >not commit to projects of any sort. The vast quantities of free software >available shows that many people are being supported one way or >another. None of us is going to join the NBA but some of us play >basketball and public parks have courts anyway.
This is all well and good, but it doesn't address my question. :) >Free software does a better job of making software. Dustin divided >software into two groups, one that everyone wants and another that's >specific to a single company or individual. GDB is an example of a >program that everyone can use. It has This is incorrect. My question pertains to software that is not available but has a market. For example, let's assume that no game of Quake's caliber had been created yet. Next, Joe User wants to play the game. Here are his options: 1. He can develop the game himself. 2. He can wait for someone else to do it. 3. He can pay a developer to do it. If he waits on someone else to do it then he is waiting on one of two groups: 1. Open source developers that feel like doing it. 2. Commercial developers that will make money from doing it. Of the two, capitalism tells us that the commercial developer is more likely to jump on the ball. Capitalism has this great way of finding solutions for a market need. It's simple history, and I have a lot of respect for it. Of course, I like the first option of the open source developer doing it, but what if nobody feels like doing it? Or more likely, what if nobody that *has the skills* feels like doing it? If this is the case then let's assume that Joe User, who prefers open source, pays an open source developer for this. Joe User then bears the total cost even though the open source developer might know there is a market for the software. The developer has to pay rent, and he can't resell his program to spread out the cost. Is there a solution to this dilemma? >more than sixty developers and the result is an excellent piece of >software. Is there any commercial company that can devote those kinds or >resources to a debugger? In the other case, of specific application, >commercial software falls down again. Are you suggesting that there isn't an existing commercial market for debuggers? --- 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.
