Subject: Re: User Views
From: "Marty Leisner" <leisner@ESO.MC.XEROX.COM>
Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1993 10:12:12 PST


He seems to be mixing up "public domain" against "copylefted".  It would be more correct
to use
the term freeware instead of "public domain".

Much of the public domain software is of dubious quality, much of the copyrighted/copylefted
software
(i.e. gnu, X11 and BSD) is superb.

Much of the commercial software exists because people don't know what to do...

I've found much freeware to be of much higher quality than much commercial software...in
addition, 
many commercial packages which distribute source code are of higher quality and give
you the
ability to modify the source (mostly libraries...)

If you want to buy and program without source, you better have a good reason...

In general, most software without source is of little use (there are exceptions, but
they're
rare).

I think part of the reason for the lower productivity in computers (no productivity
gains since the
introduction of the IBM PC in '81) is the lack of recognition among most people of the
necessity for
knowledge and expertise.  Commercial, bundled software builds on this attitude.

Most organizations cannot deal with something which doesn't come in a box...

One of my justifications to use freeware is I know who writes it (and some of the best
programmers in the world write freeware).

marty