Kier <vallon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
> On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 11:43:24 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>
>> Documentation is a different matter, but at least contact is possible. Have
>> you ever seen names of developers or addresses for feedback (let alone
>> something like Bugzilla) for Microsoft software. If you develop software for
>> Microsoft, you are a (wo)man without a name, nor a face. You do it for the
>> cheque only.
>
> Most ordinary people work mainly for the cheque at the eend of the month.
> That doesn't preclude them from enjoying what they do, or doing it
> properly.
>
It does completely preclude them from taking credit for their work.
> The problem with Windows, IMO, is more a case of 'too many cooks spoil the
> broth'.
>
> Does it still surprise anyone that software they produce is so
>> bug-ridden? The closed nature of it makes it akin to lego pieces with
>> plaster in arbitrary places (making patches, testing and maintenance
>> impossible... think DST). Honest developers don't fear or feel shy about
>> making their code visible...
>
> Are you trying to say closed source developers are inherently dishonest?
I think he means that because closed-source developers do not get to a)
show off their wares and b) get credit for them, the natural tendency to
do a really good job goes, since the work will never be seen, and even
it if is, nobody will know that you did it anyway.
Open source, contrarily, allows a developer to show off his skills and
capabilities in a positive way, whilst still getting input and
assistance from his peers. That alone is a powerful combination, and
for many creative people, is as important as being paid, particularly if
the pay is not that spectacular.
> That seems to be a rather foolish and sweeping generalisation.
>
--
| Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
| Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
| Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
|
|
