🚀 go-pugleaf

Steve Bergman <steve@netplus.net> wrote in article
<3565C401.1E387FC@netplus.net>...
> Edward Cameron wrote:
> > 
> > hmmm.... never paid a dime to troll tech and I use kde all the time. 
didn't
> > pay for it---didn't pirate it---hmm... maybe I'm too stupid to know the
> > meaning of NO, but I know the difference between 'there' and 'their'
and i
> > also know that free means I didn't pay for something...
> > 
> 
> In the free software world, "free" usually means that the source code is
> freely available to all.  Some "free" software costs money and some does
> not.  The availability of the source code tends to keep prices down. 
> Commercial software can be "free software".  This misunderstanding will
> hopefully diminish as the term "Open Source" becomes more popular.
> 
> Steve Bergman
>

I was under the impression that QT was freely usable as a component base
for those who released their software free of charge.  Conversely, if
someone wanted to make a profit off of TrollTech's work on QT, then Troll
would like a piece of that profit.  I'd say that was fair.  That way the
best of both worlds could be had; free software and for (dare I say it)
profit software.

I do however realize that if lots of programming is done based on a widget
kit that is proprietary, then it may cause some problems in the future -
that is why I would suggest that any entity creating software should make
sure that it is easily portable to another toolkit via source code
abstraction layer or encapsulation of said toolkit.

Open Source means that the program isn't free but the source code is
available for perusal?  Forgive my ignorance... :(
-- 

=======================================
codifex@airmail.NOSPAM.net
bgravitt@vha.NOSPAM.com
=======================================
My opinions are mine alone - though others may borrow...