From: "Ed Greshko" <Ed.Greshko@xxxxxxxxxxx>
jdow wrote:
I am complaining that it is outrageously expensive compared to the
cost it is equivalent in Windows. But basicly I am declaring why it
won't happen for the individual private developer.
Your arguments/statements seems to shift like the wind. In an earlier
message you said:
"I am simply stating why *I* will not develop open source software
unless somebody somewhere pays the full freight for my work time."
You complain/whine about GPL licensing because you have to release your
source code and can't just sell it. Seems like you can't deal with 2
concepts. Commercial v.s. Open Source.
Seems fair to get my whining in when I sit here and read people whining
about their missing favorite feature. Maybe my whining will educate
them about why they have something to whine about. They want ZZZ then
they can bloody well do it themselves. Don't expect folks like be to
spend the time to develop it for free for them.
Now, it just seems to be a financial issue for you. You seem to want to
develop Commercial Products....but buying an individual Qt development
license is too expensive *for you*. But, is $3,300 too expensive to
shell out to develop commercial products? Or, is your business model to
simply develop one product of marginal use? If so, then don't develop
Qt. Use something else.
I know about Qt. The entire GNU/Linux world is so large and complex
I have no idea what OTHER items I'll run afoul of if I develop.
I know quite a few people that have MSDN subscriptions that plunk down a
few $K/year.
There is some peace of mind associated with that. If I develop off
that single package I KNOW what licenses I need to obtain. As it
happens one more license was needed for the Matrox DigiSuite SDK.
There are no other licenses in between me and delivering to a
customer commercially.
I think you can speak only for yourself.
I note that over the lifetime of XP I'd have paid more for an RHEL
license than for an XP license. Linux isn't free if you want support.
If you want to sponge, which I am more honest about than most here,
then it does cost less.
Yes, you may have paid more for support of RHEL than XP. But, what
applications come with XP? You've paid more for the OS....but RHEL
includes OpenOffice. So, you need to add the cost of MS Office to your
calculations. Do you need a C-compiler? Hummm....is that additional?
And if I need OpenOffice for some reason I can download it from
OpenOffice.org. But, the kind of software I write will not require
any form of openoffice SDK. On the other hand some of what I write
might lead to an openoffice owner purchasing a license for my work
to use it on his machine, perhaps with openoffice.
That's fine.... We should all note that your email headers do show:
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869
So, we know where your heart is....
That is making a presumption that is not in evidence. That is where my
money is. I work by telecommuting. My chief customers want the software
developed for hardware which is in no way supported by Linux or even
MacOS. Since I email back and forth with the customer it's easier to
work from the OS on which I develop.
As pointed out...Thunderbird is on Windows. Evolution is available and
can even talk to Exchange Servers. I feel the smoke blowing.
Don't have an exchange server. I simply have a large email database
that makes migrating a PITA. I know what is wrong with OE. Thunderbird
is an unknown. Switching would not be "a pleasure" I fear.
(If I really had my druthers I'd be developing on what AmigaDOS might
have evolved into had Mehdi Ali and Irving Gould not been rapacious and
IMAO criminal. It had some features that 'ix and XP do not support in
any systematized manner. <shrug> That leaves me working on what is
convenient for my INCOME not my hobby. As a side point, I don't know
about you. But *I* have a few lines of Linux Kernal credit to my name.
I don't know what is more appropriate in this case. "Woopie" or "BFD".
Your choice. I was simply explaining I am NOT particularly fond of
Windows. It is baroque and broken. It is a market. I am hungry. So
I feed the market.
That was self defense. I needed to access some specific hardware. The
kernel tools for that access were broken. I wrote the software on the
Amiga. So I fixed the cooresponding code in the kernel. That is all in
accordance with the rule, "you get for free what someone else wants to
do. If that is not what you want - do it yourself. Don't bellyache."
Is asking for features bellyaching?
After the first few times it sounds like it. Don't ask, do it yourself.
Don't come off sounding like you expect the requests to be fullfilled.
It's for free, darn it. If somebody sees an income model for the feature
you want or need it'll happen. If somebody sees a hobbiest reason to
develop the feature you'll get it. Otherwise you have to do it yourself.
But you are right about one thing. It is probably unfair to label you a
Troll. Unfair to the Trolls that is....
Let's just say I got heartily tired of people around here whining about
their pet features not being part of this distribution. For God's sake
the ONLY pay most of the developers not on the staff of some large
company with a Linux stake to sell something OTHER than GNU/Linux get
is the fun of doing the work and the ego boost from hobby accomplishments
others applaud. So if a feature you want is not present - be a man and
put it in. Don't be a whiner. I'm simply trying to explain why I see
those who whine about this or that missing feature are losers.
You seem to forget that not all users are developers. And you seem to
think that all developers know everything about what features are needed
and anyone that dares suggest otherwise is a loser.
And those who are not developers forget that developers have families
to feed and doing development for free does nothing towards feeding
the families. Ask once and please try not to sound like you are
demanding it.
I wonder how many times you've looked to purchase commercial software
only to find that product X has feature Y that you want and product A
has feature B that you want....but you can't find product Z that has
feature Y and B.
So, what do you do? Could it be that you compromise and get the product
that has the "best" fit? But now, of course, you can't hack the code to
add in the missing features so you "bellyache" to the vendor. They then
go off and do a cost analysis to see if anyone else is interested in
that feature and if they will sell more product based on adding the feature.
Well, if I was not a developer it'd not get done. I'd have to pick one
or the other. Now, if it was commercial software and I asked - and
dozens of others asked, the developer would see more food on the table,
grit his teeth, and graft in the features. It means money to do that.
If it's for free and it's not something a Spoo Linux distro considers
important to its business model and if no developer with spare time
thinks it'd be a neat challenge, it has a snowball's chance in <that
other place> of happening.
(Note that I don't care if my work becomes GPL after I am paid for it
at a reasonable rate for the hours spent on it. As it happens nobody has
done that with anything significant that I have done.)
I figure I am needlessly repeating myself above. So have your shot at
it and be done. I made my point. I am a developer. I see requests for
this, that, and the other thing as a request for my time and effort
with no recompense offered. After awhile I get as offended by it as
a medical doctor who is approached by "friends" with "I have this
ache in my frazzleblort..." expecting free medical advice.
{^_^}
