🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <849@cyb-eng.UUCP> topher@cyb-eng.UUCP (Topher Eliot) writes:
>> 	Just a mild flame.  I find it very interesting that you seem to be
>> indicating that persons/companies who chose to distribute their products as
>> 'shareware' are not 'professional' developers.  Does MicroPro encourage you
>> to attack this concept?
>
>"pro-fes-sion-al adj:  ...participating for gain or livelihood in an activity
>                                            ^^^^    ^^^^^^^^^^
>or field of endeavor often engaged in by amateurs..."
>
>Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary, 1981
>(emphasis mine)

Bob Wallace distributes PC-Write as "shareware" and has gross receipts
of about a million a year, so at least some "shareware" is
"professional" in the sense you use.  Perhaps you aren't familiar with
the term shareware?  (Shareware = software distributed by unrestricted
copying but with a request that satisfied users voluntarily mail
payment to the developer.)

Further, I contend that a little dictionary learning is a dangerous
thing.  Suppose a physician or attorney provides free/pro bono services
at some time?  Is he or she being "unprofessional"?  There are more
things in English and French, Horatio, than are dreampt of in your
abbridged dictionary...
-- 
D Gary Grady
Duke U Comp Center, Durham, NC  27706
(919) 684-3695
USENET:  {seismo,decvax,ihnp4,akgua,etc.}!mcnc!ecsvax!dgary