Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site myriasb.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!lll-crg!dual!qantel!ihnp4!alberta!myriasb!cg
From: cg@myriasb.UUCP (Chris Gray)
Newsgroups: net.micro
Subject: Re: New ideas on software piracy... Flames welcome.
Message-ID: <449@myriasb.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 6-Aug-85 16:11:41 EDT
Article-I.D.: myriasb.449
Posted: Tue Aug  6 16:11:41 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 12-Aug-85 04:22:38 EDT
References: <419@gumby.UUCP>
Organization: Myrias Research, Edmonton
Lines: 37

The basic problem with the notion of free software for the masses is that
the lack of remuneration will result in a sharp decrease in the amount of
quality software available. Is this desireable?

Consider the following hypothetical example:

Whizz programmer Joe buys himself a micro and learns all about it. He works
for a big outfit that uses computers a lot, so he has, over the years, gained
a lot of experience in programming. In his spare time he writes some good
software for his micro. He can't spend too much time at it, though, since
he spends his days programming at work. He gets paid fairly well and has
saved up a nestegg. He decides to quit and go it alone as a software
developer for micros. He can then dedicate his full attention and time (and
his vast experience) towards creating GOOD software for micros. If he cannot
get adequate remuneration for his efforts (assuming what he does is really
of value, and he hasn't just been goofing off reading news), he will have
to get another job to support himself, thus resulting in less time for work
on micro software. He thus may not be able to complete the great programs
he has been working on, nor will he be able to put in all of the various
improvements and optimizations he has thought of.

Basically, writing good software is a full-time job for experienced
professionals. If proper payment for such software is not forthcoming, then
the software will simply not be produced.

I don't think we want to leave the support of programming upto the
government, so it has to be private enterprise. Perhaps I'm a bit of a
snob-programmer, but I firmly believe that 99.9% of the good software out
there has been produced by or reworked by professionals. People talk about
the "vast quantities of high-quality public-domain software". There are
a few examples I've heard of, but I've also SEEN vast quantities of junk.
Also, we must distinguish between public-domain software and "shareware"
(or whatever) where happy users are requested to send a contribution.
The latter is simply commercialism under a different name, and I think it
has excellent possibilities.

		Chris Gray    (ihnp4!alberta!myrias!cg)