You did say, "linux audio... copyrighted stuff to
pretty much excluded," and later, "Much of that software is
copyrighted," so I don't think that was particularly unfair.
> } The truncated paragraph said:
I wasn't aware that Jack not operating with all programs was a
competitive thing, and involved money or patents or nasty licensing at
all ... I thought it was because other apps simply hadn't caught up yet.
I guess I'll have to read about it a bit.
> It's actually sort of funny to watch all of the obvious manipulations and
So, I'm glad you recognize that ...
> } I realize the Lego analogy is a little broken.
I think those kind of things can help corporations who have more money
than time to throw at a problem, but am unclear as to the benefit that
the ordinary user derives from them, although it probably exists.
> To me... the variety of choices available on linux is much more important than
To my knowledge, my system is entirely open source, with the exception
of acroread and flash, and it runs well. On the desktop, I think
paid-for corporate involvement can help with unification efforts,
packaging, and hardware support issues, but that it's better if the
changes are freed eventually.
> } the whole thing tick and even worth using at all (ignoring the wonderful
I give away free time to F/OSS, and have made less-than-profitable
career choices (i.e. grad school) so that I could hack on free software,
why should I be expected to receive with open arms people who want to
build upon this free base and not give back, let alone _pay_ for it?
> } shareware developers, frankly I think they'd have a better time writing
I think corporations are the only ones really willing to pay for
individual applications on Linux. I'm personally not shelling out for
shareware when I can read, test, and contribute to free software. Time
is money, I guess, and that's how I'd like to pay, even if it costs me
more after the conversion (which indicates "libre" is more important
than "gratis" to me). I think other people feel the same way.
So, yes, from a business perspective, shareware developers for Linux
should go away and target OS X instead. From an ethical perspective, as
long as I'm not forced to use it and there always exist alternatives, I
guess I don't mind. I start to mind when everybody just uses the
non-free stuff and this results in the death of otherwise good free
Like Tim just said, I think we're just gonna have to agree to disagree,
since I'm not likely to convince you that 100% free is a good and
realistic thing, and you're not likely to convince me otherwise (I know
_I'm_ starting to repeat myself). I hope at least we can see a little
where the other is coming from now :)