🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <RRJ2aB7w164w@mantis.co.uk>, To the Ground (ttg) writes:

ttg> If the GNU way is so great, how come HP can get away with selling an HP
ttg> version of X? Why isn't there already an HP version of X available for
ttg> free? Could it be that (*gasp*) the GNU way isn't as good at producing
ttg> special limited-market versions of software as we have been led to 
ttg> believe?

I don't know about HP, but sun managed to persuade people to buy their
commercial version of an out of date X release because they wouldn't
tell anyone how their graphics hardware works. So, people had a choice
between a fast comercial one and a slower free one. (this is for
systems with a graphics accelorator).

I don't know if HP doccument their hardware well enough for third
parties to be able to produce fast graphics on them.

As for the coercivness of the GPL, I consider it justified as an
attempt to stop people doing immoral things with FSF produced code. If
one believes it is _wrong_ to distribute a program without source,
then letting people do that with your work must be wrong. 

--
rjc@cstr.ed.ac.uk			_O_
					 |<