__/ [ Mark Kent ] on Friday 09 March 2007 13:03 \__
> Dr. GroundAxe <groundaxe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>> DFS wrote:
>>> The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>>>
>>>> And the reason RedHat is making $386.22M in revenue and
>>>> $66.74M in profit is ... ?
>>>
>>> Hundreds of OSS developers are too freakin' stupid to charge for their
>>> work.
>>>
>>
>> If RedHat actually paid all the developers contributing to what they
>> repackage they'd be bankrupt. So in reality the business model isn't
>> viable as it relies on charity.
>
> Normally, Gary, I do not see your postings, however, this one seems to
> have crept through, and is worth commenting on, since your remark is so
> incorrect.
>
> Free software works by the cost of development being shared across all
> users in a way which is supportable by each of those users. Red Hat's
> business offering is support for their distribution, it is *not* to
> write the initial distribution. This is *no different* to when you buy
> a PC from Dell - they do not pay for all the developers it took to write
> Microsoft Windows, Norton Anti-Virus, Microsoft Office, and so on, they
> merely make a small contribution on an instantial basis. At *no point*
> have Dell, HP, IBM or any other OEM paid for the writing of Windows, any
> more than Red Hat have paid for the writing of their distribution.
>
> I know that you know this, of course, but it's just possible that a
> drive-by reader might be taken in by your lack of economic
> comprehension.
Why feed trolls when the weather forecast is so positive? Troll posts today
can almost be counted with one hand...
--
~~ Best wishes
Surely, Microsoft has given up on altruism in the IT industry
http://Schestowitz.com | GNU is Not UNIX | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
roy pts/1 Fri Mar 9 09:55 - 09:56 (00:00)
http://iuron.com - proposing a non-profit search engine
|
|
