[BadVista Advocate] Free software and Vista

[Jacob Maynard]

Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but Doom and Quake had open engines, and
they were the best selling games of the time, right? It seems to me that
people fail to realize that this model will work for games, even. Games
that are as good as Doom and Quake, anyway.

Jacob

> "This process works under the assumption that people are mostly honest and
> good, as compared with Vista who assumes everyone is a criminal. We're not
> condoning piracy.  The right to distribute doesn't take away the value of
> the item from the author. It just means that anybody has the right to
> distribute it (and ensure that the original author gets paid his/her due)
> with modifications and enhancements and such. Again, the idea is that you
> are not being treated as a criminal before you've even thought about it."
>
> This I can agree on.  One of the reasons Windows spread so rapidly is that
> it was easy to copy.  I'm sure a lot of college kids used unpaid copies of
> Windows, and when they became executives they recommended Windows
> throughout
> the company.  For the same reason, the RIAA should not be trying to crack
> down so hard on piracy.  These people should want to see widespread use of
> their creations.
>
> In addition, Windows used to be very open.  I used to know all the APIs,
> and
> was able to create powerful programs easily.  When Windows 3.0 launched,
> there were over 50 other companies launching applications on the same day.
> MSFT used to work closely with developers, and tried hard to get along
> with
> everyone.
>
> Today, things have really fallen apart.  Windows Genuine Advantage is
> horrible.  MSFT is spending money and time on that joke when they should
> be
> fixing bugs and improving security.  Clearly this is a case of a de facto
> monopoly taking unfair advantage of their status.  Now I am not in favor
> of
> government interference, I believe that free markets will eventually
> destroy
> an unfair monopoly.  If a company maintains monopoly status simply by
> doing
> a great job, they should be allowed to continue.  But the best way to deal
> with MSFT is groups like this one.  We can spread the word about
> alternatives and create positive change.  MSFT cannot force anyone to buy
> Vista.  In fact, consumer pressure is already taking a toll, with Dell
> offering XP again in response to complaints about Vista.  They also offer
> Linux.
>
> People need to know about bad things like WGA and DRM.  When Sony tried to
> put that spyware/rootkit DRM into place, there was a huge backlash.
> Movements like BadVista can really have an effect if they are handled
> well.
>
>
> "That's true. That's why most people who develop free (as in freedom)
> software commercially usually primarily use other methods of making money
> from it, such as selling support services and making paid-for
> customisations."
>
> Well, OK, I can see that business model working for some types of
> software.
> But for things like games and packaged software, I'm not sure most people
> really care about support or customizations.
>
>
> "you can modify it if you wish, resell it or give it away for free, you
> can
> contract other people to modify it if you don't have the time or the
> experience.. is your choice.. but there is still a market and an economy
> inside free software just not monopolized by one single vendor... people
> will always be willing to pay for quality... just because is free as in
> freedom don't means corporations will not buy it."
>
> To me this seems to contradict the previous business model, if you can
> modify that software, give it away, hire someone else to maintain it, then
> you don't need a support contract and the company that spent years
> developing the software does not get compensated for their efforts.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Advocate mailing list
> Advocate at badvista.org
> http://badvista.fsf.org/mailman/listinfo/advocate
>