In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, P Witte
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
John Sadler writes:
As Dilwyn Jones says in his article in Qtoady that TurboPtr is more
flexible
than EasyPtr, and the group members feel that software should be paid for,
George & I wondered whether the group members did not use it because it
was
free and they would be happier paying £60 to George because then they felt
the program was well worth using and the author was interested in
maintaining
it.
I wouldnt be surprised if that were the case ;) Free programs are all well
and good, but we have now begun to expect all programs to be free and that
may not be good for the continuation of the QL community. Linux is in a
different league, with universities and research intstitutions supplying
much of the quality free stuff: The authors of those programs are at least
fully funded and doing their thing during their working hours. I dont think
that is the case for QL programmers..
Yes, it is the student workforce, at work ... :-)
--
Malcolm Cadman
_______________________________________________
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
