I'm a c programmer. Does anybody work like me?

[santosh]

user923005 wrote:

I guess this is turning into an advocacy thread and it probably should
go off to some other newsgroups. I don't know which ones would be
appropriate because nothing useful takes place in them (IMO -- of
course), so I don't read them.

is an high volume alternative, but all it
might do is to start a flame thread there. Better to quietly bury this
here.

 

[Anthony Irwin]

? The most I've ever paid for Linux (Suse 10.2) is $8.99. Where can I
get Vista for that price? I'd be willing to go as high as $10.00.

If I wanted, I could pay for technical support, but I could pay extra
for Windows technical support, too. I don't have to get the support
from Company "B", either.

There are legitimate pros and cons to open source - no need to make up
strawmen.

I can download pretty much every major distro for free with my isp as
they have a mirror they also have package repositories for about half
a dozen of the most popular distros so downloading software and
updates does not cost me a cent either because anything through their
mirrors are not included in your bandwidth usage try that with mac os
x or windows.


--
Kind Regards,
Anthony Irwin

http://www.irwinresources.com
email: anthony at the above domain, - www.

 

[user923005]

user923005 wrote:

... snip ...


However the market system works. If the 'bigs' are making more
than they deserve for their effort, the underlying material is
available to anybody who wants to undercut them. Meanwhile those
who don't need (or want) the additional services don't need to buy
them. Win-win as I see it.

I agree in part with this[1] but I do not think it addresses my point.

[1] this bit:
"If the 'bigs' are making more than they deserve for their effort, the
underlying material is available to anybody who wants to undercut
them."
has a caveat as I see it. If you don't have a million dollars to set
up the infrastructure for big-time tech support, then it's not going
to work.
In fact, I think that UBUNTU is an example of what you are talking
about:
http://www.ubuntu.com/support/paid
For that matter, every commercial Linux variant besides Redhat came
after and are also examples of this.
Now, someone could say:
"There is nothing that prevents me from downloading a free instance of
Redhat tarball, removing the Redhat copyright specific stuff, and
reselling the CDs as "Greenhat Linux". This is true, of course. But
who is going to buy the tech support from you? You will need a
considerable work force to handle that end of the business. That
means considerable capital and takes it out of the hands of small
corporations.

Operations such as RH, Debian, Ubuntu even hire people (and
actually pay them) to create material that they GPL and include in
their own offerings.

Yes, and I do like this.

 

[Richard Bos]

However the market system works. If the 'bigs' are making more
than they deserve for their effort, the underlying material is
available to anybody who wants to undercut them.

Except, of course, that anybody _doesn't_.

It doesn't matter a jot how "Frea" you are. What matters is how few
scruples you have, to abuse whatever "Frea"dom, _real_ freedom (for
which, see the dictionary, not the Open Sores Holy Writs), or unfreedom
you can.

Richard

 

[Richard Bos]

I can download pretty much every major distro for free with my isp as
they have a mirror they also have package repositories for about half
a dozen of the most popular distros so downloading software and
updates does not cost me a cent either because anything through their
mirrors are not included in your bandwidth usage try that with mac os
x or windows.

Yeah, but with Vista you get the shift and punctuation keys for Frea.

Richard

 

[Al Balmer]

Hmm. Looks you might be a suitable customer for this bridge I have.

Sorry, you lost me on that one. Do you think that Vista is not worth
$10? I might agree, but I'd pay that much just for the experience,
even if I wiped the disk after.

 

[CBFalconer]

Sorry, you lost me on that one. Do you think that Vista is not worth
$10? I might agree, but I'd pay that much just for the experience,
even if I wiped the disk after.

I am intimating that Vista buyers, at any price, are suckers.
Especially see third link below.

--
<http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.txt>
<http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/423>
<http://www.aaxnet.com/editor/edit043.html>

"A man who is right every time is not likely to do very much."
-- Francis Crick, co-discover of DNA
"There is nothing more amazing than stupidity in action."
-- Thomas Matthews

 

[Malcolm McLean]

I am intimating that Vista buyers, at any price, are suckers.
Especially see third link below.

The problem is that computers can be used to pirate video and audio. It is
very hard to stop. Eventually copyright laws are going to have to change.
But Microsoft have been very responsible in trying to make sure that their
products are not used to break the law as it now stands. The result is an
unacceptable level of interference with the consumer, and one that is
perceived as destroying the functionality of the machine.

Microsoft are shooting themsleves in the foot with the anti-piracy. The
reason is that they sell expensive software to companies and other
institutions. People at home want software that they use at work, but they
generally can't afford to buy copies. So there is a raft of illegal cracks
sitting on home machines. Software is a natural monopoly, since everyone
wants a wordprocessor that can read everyone else's files, and so no new
companies can get into the market.
Remove that raft of illegal software, and suddenly a small product can
compete on price. Before you know it, MegaCorps finds that its staff are
using Bloggsware wordprocessors at home, and want the same program at work.
So there is no longer any pressing reason to have Microsoft.

 

[Richard Heathfield]

Malcolm McLean said:

The problem is that computers can be used to pirate video and audio.

Similarly, knives can be used to kill people. That doesn't mean we
should only allow the sale of blunt knives. Knives have legitimate
purposes other than killing people, and for that purpose they need to
be sharp. Computers can be used for other things than mere AV piracy,
and for that purpose they need to be sharp.

It is very hard to stop. Eventually copyright laws are going to have
to change. But Microsoft have been very responsible in trying to make
sure that their products are not used to break the law as it now
stands.

A lump of wood can't be used to rip off video and audio either. If you
want to buy something not on the basis of what it can do but on the
basis of what it *can't* do, you may find a lump of wood rather cheaper
than a copy of Vista.

The result is an unacceptable level of interference with the
consumer,
Right.

and one that is perceived as destroying the functionality of
the machine.

Right again. Worse, it will have a knock-on effect in the driver world
which will also affect Linux (and this is possibly the real motivation
behind MS's move).

Microsoft are shooting themsleves in the foot with the anti-piracy.
The reason is that they sell expensive software to companies and other
institutions. People at home want software that they use at work, but
they generally can't afford to buy copies.

In many cases, I wouldn't touch the software they use at work with a
bargepole.

So there is a raft of
illegal cracks sitting on home machines. Software is a natural
monopoly, since everyone wants a wordprocessor that can read everyone
else's files, and so no new companies can get into the market.

No, I don't want any such thing - all I want is for people to stop
assuming that everyone has such a wordprocessor (because the real truth
is that nobody has such a wordprocessor).

Remove that raft of illegal software, and suddenly a small product can
compete on price. Before you know it, MegaCorps finds that its staff
are using Bloggsware wordprocessors at home, and want the same program
at work. So there is no longer any pressing reason to have Microsoft.

Well, be fair - Visual C is worth having. But there is certainly no
pressing reason to have Vista. (In any case, someone here - was it you?
- reported that their copy of Visual C doesn't work on Vista, thus
neatly removing one of the very few reasons to have any Microsoft-based
machines at all!)

 

[Al Balmer]

Malcolm McLean said:


Similarly, knives can be used to kill people. That doesn't mean we
should only allow the sale of blunt knives. Knives have legitimate
purposes other than killing people, and for that purpose they need to
be sharp. Computers can be used for other things than mere AV piracy,
and for that purpose they need to be sharp.

In fact, you can still kill someone with a dull knife, but you can't
chop onions with it ;-)