Subject: Re: OSDD?
From: Russell Nelson <nelson@crynwr.com>
Date: 25 Aug 1998 05:08:26 -0000

Tim O'Reilly writes:
 > The biggest problem is that any business succeeds by averaging its
 > winners and its losers.  Any approach that caps that upside needs to
 > figure out how to finance the downside.

Right.  The same volunteers who work on a successful program will also
work on a non-successful program.  Then again, if enough people are
working on something to keep it going, can it be said to be a failure?
Look at CP/M.

Or is it the case that, if you can't convince any open-source
developers to work on your program, that the market won't support it,
and you'll abandon failures before investing too much in them.

Seems to me that freed software isn't just changing the rules -- it's
changing the whole game.

 > When I look at the most successful free software projects, I don't
 > see people contributing to them BECAUSE they are free, but because
 > they CAN.  The biggest benefit of free software isn't that it's free,
 > it's that it's adaptable, so you can solve your own problem.  So
 > trying to limit how much money people can make seems a bit off
 > the scent.
 > 
 > As RMS might say, the issue isn't one of price; it's one of freedom.
 > 
 > The benefits of freedom are entirely independent of how much money
 > people can make.  At least that's how it seems to me.

Right, but one of the benefits of freedom is to lower the cost and
risk of software development.

-- 
-russ nelson <rn-sig@crynwr.com>  http://crynwr.com/~nelson
Crynwr supports Open Source(tm) Software| PGPok |   Freedom is the primary
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice |   cause of Peace, Love,
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213  | +1 315 268 9201 FAX   |   Truth and Justice.