On Mon, Oct 07, 2002 at 06:37:00PM +0200, Fredrik Persson wrote: > In my case, I've considered a lot of ways of looking at things and I've come > to the conclusion that the FSF philosophy is a good one, that I like. I assure > you that I've looked nigh and far, so short-sighted is not something I can > agree > with you on.
As another viewpoint: I'm not nessecarily gungho on the whole FSF philosophy. But free software gives us the freedom to let Debian and Redhat and Ada Core Technologies exist, and I find that cool. I also find it cool the way that free software lets programs grow. The world did not need yet another Unix kernel in 1992. But because of free software, that kernel became the greatest of all. Cygnus (past times), RedHat, Suse, Ada Core Technologies, Apple, Be, AMD and Intel have all helped make GCC one of the greatest compilers ever. A good free program can grow after you've stopped taking care of it, can grow far outside what you would have been capable of growing, and can grow even after you're dead. And unlike a commerical program, which can do that, there's at least one branch always under your direct control; Linus can still release Linux 2.5.183, no matter how many people have made forks or how many people are using them. Yes, commerical software helps pay the bills; freeware lets you keep absolute control. But free software can let your program be something amazing; not just yet another C compiler, or yet another Un*x kernel, but one of the best. -- David Starner - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Falshe fridn iz beser vi a rikhtige krig. / A bad peace is better than a good war. - Yiddish Proverb
