Re: Mozilla is not an end user application--huh?

[Warren Bell]

"Justin H." wrote:
> 
> Warren Bell wrote:
> >
> > Gervase Markham wrote:
> > >
> > > > You just described 90% of open source software.  Is that not end-user
> > > > software also?
> > >
> > > No. The e.g. version packaged (and, often, patched) by Red Hat for which
> > > people pay $39.95 is end user software.
> > >
> >
> > But what about all the OS software we don't pay for? (AAMOF I get RH for
> > free also through download)
> 
> Right.  When you pay for it, you pay for support, documentation, and
> other support related functions directly from Redhat.  When you want a
> program packaged with Redhat, or have a problem of some sort with your
> Redhat install, don't expect to talk to Linus about it.
> 

Right, I wasn't desputing that.  From the original statment:

> Because being an end-user application involves packaging, advertising 
> and (most importantly) support, none of which mozilla.org is able to give.

I was saying that that's not a valid reason for an app not to be an
end-user product.  90% of OSS has no packaging or support, but it's
still an end-user application.