Re: He's not wrong
>"if something costs nothing, it has no value.
Open source isn't about being free at the point of use..."
That is a good point.
Years back (pre-www) you had to pay someone real money (ie. more than the cost of the media + p&p) to get your hands on a CD of open source code which you were expected to compile.
Now it seems everyone thinks that a ready-to-run distro is open source and should therefore be free, likewise the automatic updates.
Yes, I know about the marketing considerations and technology advances that have influenced the decision, but it is clear we have become accustomed to an unsustainable state-of-affairs. It would be interesting to see what the market reaction would be to an open source product (distro or application) that came with usage limitations (eg. 30 days limited trial, updates disabled etc.) that could be unlocked for a subscription... Wouldn't be surprised if MS are or have seriously looking at this possibility.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
