Subj : Re: GNU Public Licences Revisited (again)
To   : comp.programming
From : Willem
Date : Mon Sep 26 2005 04:11 pm

Joe wrote:
) There's a effect where chimpanzies will make a "I've found food!"
) exclamation when they find food - nearby chimps will hear this and come to
) the location of the food.  Now, for the _individual_ chimp that found the
) food, it is invariably better if that chimp could eat as much of the food as
) it wanted before calling out - but it's an inbuilt behaviour that the chimp
) cannot control.  Naturalists have observed chimps putting their hands over
) their mouths when they cry out.  I.e. there is a conflict in the chimps
) brain when it finds food:   inbuilt behaviours that have evolved naturally
) and have given the chimp species a particular advantage, over the wants of
) an individual from that species.
)
) So, to consider what is better for the buyer alone is to ignore a bigger
) picture.

Well then, could you make a case why closed source is better in the bigger
picture ?

Besides the fact that 'locking in' your buyers is good for a vendor ?

Monopolies are also good for the vendors, but it is widely accepted that
it is not good for the big picture.  Closed Source could just as well be
argued to not be good for the big picture.

Here's a random argument:  Open Source Software means that the vendor has
to deliver quality support, because otherwise other companies would step
in and deliver better support.  This means that the overall quality of
support will be better, which is a good thing.
(This is the old 'competition is good, monopoly is bad' argument.)

So, why is Closed Source better for the 'Big Picture' than Open Source ?


SaSW, Willem
-- 
Disclaimer: I am in no way responsible for any of the statements
            made in the above text. For all I know I might be
            drugged or something..
            No I'm not paranoid. You all think I'm paranoid, don't you !
#EOT

.