🚀 go-pugleaf

"Richard Steiner" <rsteiner@visi.com> wrote in message
news:slrn89gdop.a7.rsteiner@skypoint.com...
> Here in comp.os.os2.misc, J. Clarke <nospam@nospam.nospam>
> spake unto us, saying:
>
> >"Richard Steiner" <rsteiner@visi.com> wrote in message
> >news:FV/l4oHpvC8D092yn@visi.com...
> >
> >> Here in comp.os.os2.misc, "J. Clarke" <nospam@nospam.nospam>
> >> spake unto us, saying:
> >>
> >> >Well that's fine.  So how much _does_ Linus Torvalds get out of each
copy
> >> >of Red Hat, Mandrake, SuSE, etc?  Personally I pay for those to get
the
> >> >bundled commercial apps.
> >>
> >> Linus is but one of several dozen kernel developers now, essentially
> >> the "project leader" if you will.  He started things, but it's hardly
> >> just his show anymore, and he is no longer "the author".  Other people
> >> like Alan Cox, Stephen Tweedie, and Andrea Arcangeli are deserving of
> >> support as well, at least if you think kernel development is important.
> >
> >You're dissembling.  How much does Red Hat pay each of these people?
>
> I believe Alan works (and is paid directly by) for Red Hat.

He's one.  Does he work on royalty or salary?

> I don't know anything about the financial involvement of the others,
> but each of them likely received a lot from the Red Hat and VA Linux
> IPOs (since they are prominent open source figures).

Did they own stock in Red Hat or VA Linux?  If not, then no matter how
prominent they might be the IPO wouldn't make them a dime.

> >> However, a typical Linux distribution is a LOT more than a kernel, and
> >> some groups like XFree86.org and others also deserve support, IhMO.
> >
> >And how much do they get out of each copy?
>
> I don't have that information.

In other words you don't really know if the people who actually developed
the darn thing make a cent out of what you pay.

> >> Most of the major distros come with very few commercial apps anymore
> >> (Red Hat used to include some in the 4.x and 5.x days, but no longer).
> >> Unless you're counting the demo disc?
> >
> >Quantity doesn't matter.  Utility does.  StarOffice is a commercial app.
> >DB2 is a commercial app.  To name a couple.
>
> How is this relevant?  StarOffice is easily obtainable without paying a
> dime -- there's no dependency on purchasing a Linux distribution.  I've
> no interested in DB2, so I don't know about its availability, but I
> don't think its availability is dependent on that either.

Wasn't aware that Sun had turned StarOffice into freeware.  As for DB2, I
seriously doubt that IBM gives away their premier database product.

> What's your point?

No more point than your claim that you pay to help out the developers.

> >> I generally pay for the official versions initially because I like the
> >> fact that many of the creators of the more "modern" Linux distributions
> >> are adding value in terms of installation and administration routines,
> >> security updates, package management, and other things.  But I also
> >> continue to buy subsequent "official" versions because I want to give
> >> those folks support in what little way I can.
> >
> >I see.  So do you speak for the market or are you speaking for a few
> >goody-two-shoes types?
>
> I think I've already made that very clear.

So you don't speak for the market?

> >> >Now, what percentage of the potential customer base for an OS/2 device
> >> >driver for a relatively new sound card feel the same way you do?
> >>
> >> I have no idea, as I speak for only myself.
> >
> >Well, sir, there is your problem.
>
> Problem?  You would rather I presume to speak for you as well?

If you are going to convince anyone that it makes sense to develop
commercial third party device drivers for OS/2 under terms that require that
any purchaser can then give them away, then you need to make a case that
enough users will pay for them to recover the development and distribution
costs with enough left over to make doing this more attractive than
investing the same money in stocks and bonds.

If you don't speak for the market, then your opinion has no value in that
context.

> >Someone who is trying to make money selling a product basis decisions on
> >what the market will do.  If you have no idea what the market will do
> >then don't pontificate about market strategies.
>
> Look, asshole, I just recently entered this thread by making the simple
> statement that I would be willing to pay for a driver even if there were
> source available, but I made *NO* general claims about a market or the
> actions that it would take.

The market doesn't CARE what you will do if you are the only person doing it
unless you are purchasing in enough volume to have a significant impact on
the market.

> Try folding up the pompous attitude and putting it away for a while, at
> least if you expect a civil response here.

Try addressing the issue under discussion instead of going off and raising a
red herring.

> >> for both Linux and FreeBSD here (OSS from 4Front Technologies), and
> >> OS/2 would be no different for me.  I've already put my money where my
> >> mouth is at $30 a copy on those other platforms to get decent Creative
> >> Labs AWE32 and AWE64 support, and would certainly do the same for OS/2
> >> support for a newer card if I had one.
> >
> >Well, that's fine.  But you admit already that you don't have the
foggiest
> >idea what the market will do.  Furthermore, are those produces freeware
or
> >are they commercial software?
>
> OSS has a freeware version (with source), and they sell a commercial
> version that has more capabilities.  In my case, I could have used the
> free version, since it supports Creative Labs cards), but I chose to
> support their cross-platform sound driver development efforts by giving
> them money.

So will most of the potential market use the freeware or the commercial
version?  And will most of the potential market choose to give them money
when it is not required?

> >> >> I don't register crippled software at all as a general rule, but if
I
> >> >> see something I think is cool, I'll pay for it out of principle, or
to
> >> >> encourage further development, or sometimes just because I happen to
> >> >> like the author.
> >> >
> >> >And you like some faceless Taiwanese software company enough that you
> >> >want to support them?
> >>
> >> I might.  I pay for a lot of software here from companies all over the
> >> planet.  What are they writing that I might care about?
> >
> >The device driver in question.
>
> I'm not familiar with a specific device driver...?  You referring to
> the PCI 128 device driver mentioned in the subject line?

Read the thread.

> If I had such
> a card and someone was writing a driver, I'd pay for it.  No question.

Even if you could obtain it at no charge?

> >> >As for "further development", how much development does an OS/2 device
> >> >driver for a sound card _need_?
> >>
> >> If written correctly the first time?  Not much.  ;-)
> >
> >Bingo--so why pay for "support" or "development"?
>
> I pay to (1) encourage a developer to continue in a direction, and (2)
> to use software legally.  The relationship of #1 to a specific product
> life cycle obviously varies depending on the nature of the product.

I'm not asking why _you_ pay.  I'm asking why enough users would pay to make
it worth the developer's while to develop the product.

--

---

--- John

Reply to jclarke at eye bee em dot net