Re: the free software paradigm [was Re: Amazon used lisp & C exclusively?

Kent M Pitman wrote:
There are practically no examples of free software destroying any
product that offered superior capabilities.

Because most examples are like mine. They are embarrassing errors in
judgment, and opening them to public scrutiny is painful and something
any sensible person would avoid.

That doesn't ring true for me.

If the "party line" is "free software is always good", but the truth is
"free software can just as easily be disasterous for the programmer,
the market and the consumer," surely lots of people would have fallen
afoul of free software's dark side, and they'd be terribly vocal about
it?

It seems more likely to me that most opponents of free software are
actually doing just fine but would be doing better if it didn't exist,
and a minority have experienced genuine hardship at the hands of
"non-competition" from free software.

But as you seem to accept, there's a lack of data. Charismatic
assurances that free software will cause the end of the computing
industry as we know it in a bad way Real Soon Now are as worthless as
charismatic assurances that free software will cause the end of the
computing industry as we know it in a /good/ way Real Soon New.

*Prove* to me that uncritical acceptance of free software causes
significant harm, or else put up with it.

E.g GIMP vs. Photoshop, CVS vs. Perforce or Clearcase.

What's your point? That there's no reasonably priced offering someone
offers that some bored programmer can't dupliate for free, assuring
anyone who wants to invest in something that they will have to endure
someone making a free version?

Paintshop Pro?

In other words, free software is just another competitor.

It is not. It is often paid for out of the pockets of parents who don't
realize their kids are not "working their way through college" but instead
"squandering their future by making sure there is no market for them
later". It is often paid for by businesses in unrelated markets that don't
care if they make a mess of an unrelated market they don't care about.
It's often paid for by people who think there's no chance they're doing
something that is hurting one person even at the same time as they are
intending to help another.

The motivation of the people who make and fund free software is
irrelevant as to the question of it being a competitor to proprietary
software.

People are taught the dogma "give away stuff and it's good, charge money
and it's bad; and especially don't let someone charge for something more
than the materials they took to make it". Bleah. That's just simple
communism dressed up in capitalist clothes.

Argumentum ad communism? You can do better than that.

Really, I don't see what your argument is.

From what I've seen, you're disillusioned because people might make a
free software version of anything you happen to work on.

But what I'm not seeing is what's magical about *free* software here.
If I made a program and licensed it for $100 per copy, and somebody
else made an equivalent program and licensed it for $30 per copy, I
probably wouldn't sell many copies. If I'd predicated my business upon
selling my program, I might even be out of a job. It'd be my tough
luck: I offered a service but the market decided it wasn't worth the
price tag.

What are we to do? Discourage people from distributing software for
free on the basis that somebody who wants to charge us for equivalent
software might get put out of business? If you're charging me for
something I could get for free with no extra benefits, why do you
deserve to be _in_ business? To me, this is like saying I shouldn't let
people breath my air for free if they visit my flat, because the guy
next door might want to charge them for breathing _his_.

On the other hand, if you're charging me for a clearly superior product
but are unsuccessful in the market, then that's a shame, but "free
software" isn't to blame. Plenty of products are driven out of the
market by _non-free_ competitors. The blame lies with the fact that
other producers were permitted to compete with you.

It seems to me that picking on free software is an easy choice because
it looks like a way to get the competition out of the market without
harming yourself. If you'd lost out to a commercial offering, I think
you'd be just as upset, but wouldn't be arguing that companies should
be careful not to harm their competition when releasing products e.g.,
by setting their prices too low. That'd be price fixing and is
generally considered a bad thing.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Free software vs. commercial software Was: Comparing Lisp conditions to Java Exceptions
    ... the fact is that I don't recall Kent mentioning that he has been ... > The real pain of free software is that one can't afford NOT to use ... being proved for the special case of a commodity market. ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: the free software paradigm [was Re: Amazon used lisp & C exclusively?
    ... Not in a culture where being a winner is lauded and being a loser is a source of shame - people think they're losers and remain silent - i.e., they blame themselves not the economic forces that led to their failure. ... And this isn't even the broad market which includes many companies which fail outright and are de-listed ... Now, to bring this back to the original topic of discussion, how much of the tech bubble was due the over-hyped "benefits" of free software? ... How many people lost large portions of their retirement savings investing in companies whose business model was centered on free software - RHAT anyone? ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: Comparing Lisp conditions to Java Exceptions
    ... > One could make the same complaint about Microsoft as it absorbs all ... > depriving utility writers of a market. ... submitted a heap of proposals for changes to the language. ... Back to the topic of free software, ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: Comparing Lisp conditions to Java Exceptions
    ... > I'd much rather just code software and give it away. ... not impossible to sell a product in the same market. ... think for-profit software can have an advantage here at least for larger ... free software types can, they have a product that will sell. ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: Comparing Lisp conditions to Java Exceptions
    ... He helped explain why our bonds of community are much weaker than before. ... They claim that we've transitioned to a free market morality, ... too much stuff in the government; in Europe: ... would likely sponsor production of free software. ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)