Subj : Re: GNU Public Licences Revisited (again) To : comp.programming From : Joe Butler Date : Sun Sep 25 2005 10:59 pm "Willem" wrote in message news:slrndje1f8.2o03.willem@toad.stack.nl... > Joe wrote: > ) > ) > ) > ) "MSCHAEF.COM" wrote in message > ) news:tqadnefklo61aKveRVn-hg@io.com... > )> Closed source restricts you to making possibly impotent petitions for > )> help from someone else. > ) > ) Perhaps. But this is not the only factor to consider. > > Then please! Enlighten us! > > What does Close-Source Software have that Open-Source Software does not ? > > You can bash the benefits of OSS-over-CSS all you want, but that > doesn't change the fact that you have yet to mention a single benefit > of CSS-over-OSS. And without that, you simply have no case. Experience of using both open source and closed source software leads me to this conclusion. Having experienced Linux desktops, I'll stick with Windows anytime. Having experienced Linux servers (I'll use them, but I'd probably try out Windows alternertives next time). Havnig attempted to find information on problems in open source and closed source systems - I'm more likely to find a fix on the Internet for closed source systems. There are loads of reasons. Overall, the closed nature and the initial cost associated with closed source are generally small in comparision with the tedious issues that need to be resolved with typical open source efforts. There are some open source apps that I use in preference to closed source (e.g. Firefox browser) - but I don't use it because it's open source (I only download the binary - I have no interest in the source code). As soon as Windows Vistar (aka Longhorn) is released, I'll be looking at IE7 and Office 12 (Office 12 blows the pants off of open office). .