🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1993Jan10.062319.17213@news2.cis.umn.edu> tyrell@herring.micro.umn.edu (john drexler) writes:

>       You are doing the equivalent to what the Japanese microchip
> industry did to the United States counterpart: dumping. Every time you
> create a software product, and give it out -- free -- to the public,
> some private software developer is taking the brunt of it.

To continue on the Japanese line, look at how the US auto industry
defended itself against the import cars in the last ten years, which
at the time were better quality and less expensive than US cars.  They
used better process technology and QA to improve the product.

If the software industry were to defend itself against public domain and
copyleft products, it must improve and emphasize the areas where it is
already distinguished: sales/marketing networks, glossy documentation,
support and updates, and especially QA.  Microsoft, for example, is
surely capable of producing a compiler as good as gcc or a windowing
system as as versatile as X11, but it hasn't tried yet: Joe Beancounter
is--for now--happy with the current cost, convenience, capability, and
quality levels of shrinkwrap software.

In the end, there will be both room and need for all three softwares:
PD, copyleft, and proprietary.  Their distinguishing attributes will
change.

---
 Mitchell N. Perilstein   CAD Language Systems, Inc.   410-992-5700 x225 
 Member, League for Programming Freedom.  Mail lpf@uunet.uu.net for info.