🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <2847@bruce.cs.monash.OZ.AU> alanf@bruce.cs.monash.OZ.AU (Alan Grant Finlay) writes:
>In article <Aug.7.15.00.09.1990.12840@dimacs.rutgers.edu>, srm@dimacs.rutgers.edu (Scott R. Myers) writes:
>> 
>> One possibility is to give software an honest test drive before
>> deciding to give it any use.  If the product is worth while enough
>> they will go ahead and purchase it.  I'll probably get flamed for that
>> statement but lets face it, any worthwhile piece of software these
>> days is worth the cost of the support you get from the manufacturer.
>> In other words copying disks and manuals is not gonna make it...
>> 
>
>I suggest this is too close to the truth for comfort.  What we should really do
>is ban the copyright of software altogether.  Over the past few years I have
>seen more harm than good come out of software copyrightability.  I know many 
>will disagree but I am serious - think about it!  What we should pay for is
>the support.  Consumers should refuse to buy (or use!) copyright software and
>and insist on the source code ......[stuff deleted]

                   ^^^^^^^^^^
               YEAH RIGHT!!!!


It would be IMPOSSIBLE to provide support to over a million different
customized versions of the product.

I could just see a call:

   "It doesn't work right. It hangs when I ..."
   
tech- "what version are you using?"

   "Well our consultant installed it and then said he could
    do some things for us to make it run faster, then the
    boss's genius kid came in and decided to make it support
    our Joe Blow's super duper .........."


RIGHT!!!!

Sunni

+-------------------------------------------------------------+
| Disclaimer:   I don't speak for Bill or anyone else. ;)     |
+-------------------------------------------------------------+