Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!ukma!uflorida!novavax!proxftl!bill From: bill@proxftl.UUCP (T. William Wells) Newsgroups: comp.misc Subject: free versions of complex software (Re: So let's talk about FSF) Message-ID: <780@proxftl.UUCP> Date: 18 Sep 88 05:22:22 GMT References: <720@proxftl.UUCP> <14061@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> <756@proxftl.UUCP> <1@elgar.UUCP> Reply-To: bill@proxftl.UUCP (T. William Wells) Organization: Proximity Technology, Ft. Lauderdale Lines: 63 Summary: Expires: Sender: Followup-To: Distribution: Keywords: In article <1@elgar.UUCP> ag@elgar.UUCP (Keith Gabryelski) writes: : In article <756@proxftl.UUCP> bill@proxftl.UUCP (T. William Wells) writes: : >Not likely. The diversity of abilities and knowledge needed to : >make our kind of software isn't likely to come together for the : >purpose of creating free software. : : It already has: : : [listing of various well known free programs] Excuse me, but please read my sentence again: it is talking about *our* kind of software, not just any software. The free spelling checkers out there are rather primitive compared to the stuff we sell. I'm hoping that no one will take this as commercial hype, but I haven't seen anything remotely comparable to our spelling system. (N.B. We do not sell user interfaces, so what I am comparing our stuff with is the underlying code, not the display stuff.) If anyone thinks that they know of a better, I'd be glad to hear of it. : >But anyway, even if it did, we'd be moving on to bigger and better : >things. : : If I haven't completely misunderstood, you are saying that once a free : product is released, it is immediately outdated (or will be in a short : period of time). You have misunderstood. My statement referred to the fact that, for certain kinds of software (like ours), the normal course of events is for a commercial outfit to write their version; then noncommercial types might write a better version. It is often the case that the free version is better than the original. This comes from the nature of this kind of software. You see, what we are doing requires the cooperation of diverse individuals, but the final product is not one that people were motivated enough to write, given the difficulty of it. But there was a market for it, and so we developed a product. As time goes on, the effort to create the product decreases, because of, among other things, better computer systems, better programming tools, and an increased availability of the knowledge needed to build the product; as a result, various individuals or small groups then do their versions. Of course, they have the benefit of learning from our mistakes, better tools, and more effective computer systems. These are why they can build a better version. These people are also often better motivated than those who build commercial products (though not in our case), and they are also not hindered by nasty things like deadlines. These, too, contribute to the possibility of better versions. My own guess is that there will be equivalent free spelling checkers in perhaps five years or so, but I'd be surprised to see them in less than three. What I was saying is that, as time goes on, even if some people decide to do free spelling checkers, equivalent to ours, we will go on to do something different which, again, is probably beyond the current means and interests of those who write free software. --- Bill novavax!proxftl!bill