It is amusing to see the anti-microsoft sentiment when open source software is discussed.
Why would that be amusing? Microsoft has spent tens of millions of dollars in the past year sponsoring various sorts of mud-and-FUD attacks in the press and in the courts, in an ill-conceived campaign to bad-mouth individuals who are involved in producing open source software. It's as if Aerosmith took out ads in newspapers to tell everybody that guys who play in garage bands are communists and a threat to the music industry. It's quite bizarre; it borders on thuggery for a $30 billion corporation to turn its PR guns on hobbyists working at home at night.
It is true that Microsoft faces competition from some open source projects, notably linux, but that is because those projects are being promoted by commercial enterprises that have sales forces and marketing budgets. Red Hat, IBM, and now Novell certainly belong on Microsoft's radar as guys who would take sales away from them. OK, those are legitimate targets of Microsoft's wrath. But not the guy coding Mightnight Pizza software. Spending money to call that guy a communist? What the hell is that about? Somebody at Microsoft has a screw loose if he thinks articles like this are doing anything but needlessly making enemies out of people who may well be in the approval chain on software deals where they work. It's one of the dumber things I've ever seen a company do.
IMHO it is a bad idea for long term revenue for software developers to train the "consumer" to think that software should be free.
It's a little late for that, don't you think? For at least the last ten years, Windows has come free with any computer consumers can buy. And IE comes "free" with Windows. As does Media Player. Tens of millions of consumers now think that computers come with a free operating system, web browser, and media player. Considering the enormity of the success that Microsoft has had with its OEM selling motion, I think that any efforts by you to reverse that tide are futile.
Currently, it's vogue for some companies is to call the software free and charge for support. Its their way of differentiating in the marketplace.
What's the difference between that and Dell selling laptops that have Windows pre-loaded on them? They're giving away the software to sell you the laptop. Now comes Microsoft to tell us that people who want to give away software are communist looneytoons. Their chutzpah boggles the mind.
Why would that be amusing?
It is amusing since you are reacting in a similar fashion to one whose religion is being threatened / disparaged.
What has Microsoft done to you personally to make you feel so threatened and insecure?
It's a little late for that, don't you think? For at least the last ten years, Windows has come free with any computer consumers can buy. And IE comes "free" with Windows. As does Media Player. Tens of millions of consumers now think that computers come with a free operating system, web browser, and media player.
That is a specious statement and is equivalent to postulating the fact tires come free with any car you buy, so people are trained to expect free tires when they want/need a new set. That argument does not wash.
The cost of the operating system is included in the cost of the computer just as the cost of the tires are included in the cost of the vehicle. The same is true of Internet Explorer and Media player. At one time radios were an expensive upgrade to a car. But now, you would have a difficult time finding a car in a dealer show room without one. At one time, an internet browser was a costly add on product (ie, Netscape at $50) but now it is just standard equipment in the operating system. It is not free, just included in the cost of the OS. I feel sure, a couple of cents/dollars is factored in to the cost of every Windows license to pay for Microsoft's development expenses related to IE & media player. Its just not listed as a separate fee.
I am not advocating the fact that open source is evil though it does smell of communism:
com·mu·nism  ( P ) Pronunciation Key (k m y -n z m)
n.
- A theoretical economic system characterized by the collective ownership of property and by the organization of labor for the common advantage of all members.
- Communism
- A system of government in which the state plans and controls the economy and a single, often authoritarian party holds power, claiming to make progress toward a higher social order in which all goods are equally shared by the people.
- The Marxist-Leninist version of Communist doctrine that advocates the overthrow of capitalism by the revolution of the proletariat.
It is admirable the dude at Midnight Pizza software is giving of his time so generously. On the same token, it is not evil for a person to desire to charge for the work that he produces / owns and protect his intellectual capital from others using it without renumeration.
Again TANSTAAFL - There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch. |