🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <9107191747.AA23652@mole.gnu.ai.mit.edu> rms@gnu.ai.mit.edu (Richard Stallman) writes:
>Most users think that GNU software is pretty high quality.
>But it certainly has some weak points which can use improvement.
>
>If you feel it is worth paying for better software, how about paying
>for better free software?  You could pay someone to make the
>improvement you would like.  Look in etc/SERVICE for a list of service
>providers you can choose from.

How can one program, no matter how good and how well-maintained, possibly meet
the different needs, styles, philosophies, etc. of hundreds of millions of text-
editor users?  I think the point was that, for the good of the users, there 
must be competing programs.  Right now there doesn't seem to be a likely way 
for some group to get paid to write a free editor to compete with emacs, and 
one that costs good money starts with an unfair disadvantage...

I'm not sure whether I agree with it, but the original point seemed to be
that competition is good but that free software can, especially when it is
large enough and gets good enough, discourage competition.  This is definately
an interesting point of view since the free software people will have you
beleive that only free software encourages competition.

The issues appear similar as those for socialized medicine.  Currently (in
the U.S.) medical care is much too expensive, but those who can afford it can
get good medical care, those who can't don't get any.  Some argue that the
"morally right" thing is to socialize medicine, and conceed that it would
result in a different standard of care, but not different enough that we
should really be concerned.  In the mean time, some doctors have dedicated 
their lives to treating the poor as best they can, even though it is
financially difficult for them to do so.  Fortunately, they do get some grants
and donations.  If a second doctor wanted to serve the same people, however, 
he'd be crazy to compete for those grants and donations.

So if we really want to make the cost of software reasonable, and want to
give every person access to the same software as every other, we'll have to
figure out how to socialize software development.  If we do, we can expect the
standard of software for the richest corporations to decline, but we may
feel that the real benefits to society outweigh that.  In the mean time, GNU
makes it's free software, and is fortunate enough to get some grants and
donations.  Someone else who wants to make a living at writing a free text
editor or 'c' compiler, however, will have serious problems.


-- 
  Dale Larson, Software Engineer, Amiga Network Development, Commodore-Amiga
                         dlarson@cbmvax.commodore.com