going about it all wrong
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| mojavelinux Oct 15, 2004 4:55 AM EDT |
Ever since I first saw the "donate" buttons on sourceforge, I have been thinking about this issue. I think the point is being missed. People that write software for free expect nothing for it, an example of the one of the old golden rules, give without expecting to receive. So do I feel wronged when companies make money by using this software or my donate button is ignored? Absolutely not. I could even be employed by one of those companies today. Free software is about empowering an economy. I write free software and the world improves. I don't want dollars in my pocket later down the road because all of a sudden another person figured out how to generate revenue using a service model. That is a sellout. |
| techieMoe Oct 15, 2004 5:23 AM EDT |
I agree. Most OSS programmers I know aren't "starving artists" who rely on their software to live. They do it because they love it, and don't expect to make money from it. I do the same. The FOSS I work on is for fun, not for profit. If someone downloads my code and finds a usefulness for it, GREAT! If not, I'm enjoying working on it, and that's all that matters to me... |
| Glimmung Oct 15, 2004 6:30 AM EDT |
Again we have people badgering with the idea of free software and making money. let me state that very very few software companies ever make more than marginal money. There are only a dozen or so, and they all rely on the monopoly principle and the forced upgrade to be successful in selling software. If M$ were to start loosing it's monopoly position, say only 50% of the market, most of those companies would probably be out of business a year or two later. Software is really only profitable when there is a high majority ownership model. Most software companies make money from service. Money is made in FOSS, it can and is done by many people and distributions. What many of these people who are making this argument seem to consistently fail to understand is that money is not the root of a capital society, barter is. And in this sense if one contributes a little money here or there, helps other people with a problem, provide patches, writes new programs, or documentation, or gets involved in any way they are giving something back. Payment in kind is a way many people around the world live. I do something for you, you do something for me. Both are happy and both get something they need. Many small projects are more successful when they ask for something specific in return (such as a bigger Hard Disk Drive). Let me give a little example from the real world. I was attempting to set up a firewall for a friend and was having a few difficulties with Fedora as the base. I know a guy who works locally and a 10 min call and a few follow ups put me on the right track (I'm a user first you understand). The guy was more than happy with the maple syrup he received from me which was the deal, he loves it in his coffee but it is a bit expensive to justify such extravagant use. But you ask 'where did I get the maple syrup from?', Well I got that in return for working wood for the winter pile for a friend, who makes the stuff. This is the stuff my and many other peoples lives are made of. I may make my money from one company, but I don't rely on the wage packet for everything in my life. |
| zjim Oct 15, 2004 7:21 AM EDT |
In working for many custom software companies, it wasn't the software that we were selling as much as the service and maintenance. The idea that the software industry needs a new model seems a bit twisted to me. It seems it started as a service industry and was taken by companies like M$ into a shrink wrap, pay for what you get, not what you want software, because every one knows that software developers know what every one else need and want. I've often done as Glimmung and bartered services and goods for knowledge or other services or goods. This is what makes GPL software great. Every one shares their ideas and every one can benefit. I post several utilities as GPL and don't care how they get used or modified, as long as others find them or the idea behind them useful. If some one finds a way to make money from them, more power to them. My satisfaction came from the learning how to solve a problem or automate a task with a few lines of code. Besides, like others I've always had a day job programming for one company or another. |
| phsolide Oct 15, 2004 8:41 AM EDT |
One can write a lot of software that matches only a very small market. Just as an example, I recently wrote an interpreter to verify the "recursive functions" theory that mathematical logicians (e.g. Kurt Godel, Alonzo Church) use to prove incomputability. The market potentially encompasses every mathematics or computer software major who takes a theory of computability class. Gee whiz, what a huge market, and boy do those individuals have a lot of disposable income. The piece missing here: cost of a transaction, which includes finding a seller (or buyer), negotiating a price, and exchanging goods for money or goods for other goods. eBay lowers transaction costs in some markets as an example of that, as does money itself - you don't have to hunt around for someone who has a good you need that needs the good you have. Sometimes, the cost of the transaction just comes out too high, and you might as well give away the good you possess, especially when "giving it away" means sending a very-low-cost-copy. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!