On Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 12:37:11PM +0000, Dan Kolb wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Monday 11 Feb 2002 10:31 am, Jonathan Bacon wrote:
It is so stupid this concept that people have that free is bad - and I think the only thing that will quash it is case studies that prove that a technology that is free can be useful.
Eventually this stupid misconception about free == sh*t should be dust when people can see others making good use of free software.
I think that the main misconception about free == sh1t is when you look at a lot of freeware Windows programs, they are sh*t compared to the expensive commercial versions. Yes, there are a few decent freeware programs around, most look like they've been coded in VB by a bored zoo monkey.
I *know* that there's the difference between free (gratis) and Free (libre) software, but to the average corporate mentality, they'll think about free as in freeware, rather than a Free commercial-quality (uckk...I hate that phrase) application.
If that makes any sense :)
Yes it does make sense. The `free' Windows software available is generally truly horrid and when I originally started using Linux I was fairly resigned to the `fact' that it would be horrid too. But then I didn't realise at the time that really it had been evolving since the end of the 60's if not before. The problem with the `free' Windows software is that it doesn't come from a culture where people would freely distribute their code, unlike unix with it's largely academic roots. Hence, it's tendency to be coded by one clueless monkey. There are a few notable exceptions but they seem to be ported unix apps or stuff that works with unix eg. putty. So you're right, `free' unix software is equated in peoples minds with `free' Windows software whereas the two are as different as chalk & cheese. -- Frank *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* Boroughbridge. Tel: 01423 323019 --------- PGP keyID: 0xC0B341A3 *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* http://www.esperance-linux.co.uk/ Succumb to natural tendencies. Be hateful and boring.