🚀 go-pugleaf

>What is my incentive to write new GPL'ed software?  Sure, I can sell support
>for it, but so can other programmers.  Their cost in reading and understanding
>my source sufficiently to support it is, I would guess, less than my
>development costs.  I am better off *NOT* writing the new code, and instead
>concentrating on learning to support other programmers' new code.

>OK, so some user will come along and pay me to write new software?
>But to them, software is just a tool that they use in their business.
>Isn't it going to be in their interest to ask me to develop for them
>a proprietary version?

Good point. But if most software is GPL'ed then it will presumably take
longer to develop a completely proprietary solution to the problem than
it would to develop a GPL'ed solution. The proprietary solution will cost
more to the user and they have to decide if it is worth it.

I imagine in some industries the use of one particular piece of software
over another (I have in mind a designing application) could make a large
difference to profits, so the extra expense to keep it proprietary might
be worth it.

On the other hand, for common tools, like editors and backup programs,
it makes little difference so the user will go for the best value that
meets their needs.

				Mark.
--
Mark Dobie                              M.R.Dobie@uk.ac.soton.ecs (JANET)
University of Southampton		M.R.Dobie@ecs.soton.ac.uk (The World)