🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <23261@cbmvax.commodore.com> dlarson@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dale Larson) writes:

   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?

Right, there are non-competing markets for a number of text editors.

   I think the point was that, for the good of the users, there must
   be competing programs.

But if different people are going to be using these different programs,
then they aren't competing.  The people who don't like Emacs aren't going
to use it, no matter the cost.  They'll write their own vi clone, or
brief clone (to name two free clones that I am aware of).

   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.

Why is competition good?  Competition is a means to an end -- that of having
good software (free or otherwise).  If we can get the end without the
inefficiencies of competition, why bother with it?

   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.

Tell that to Cygnus Support...

--
--russ <nelson@clutx.clarkson.edu> I'm proud to be a humble Quaker.