Subject: Re: A Philosophical Diversion
From: Erik Naggum <>
Date: 1998/10/09
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
Message-ID: <>

* (David Steuber "The Interloper")
| I have to disagree with you on one point.  Linux is a better end-user
| environment than NT.

  uh, I'm not sure we disagree, because your statement is not qualitatively
  comparable to the statements "Linux is a programming environment" and "NT
  is an end-user environment".  I was _not_ comparing the two, I was only
  pointing out what they are best at, almost, but not explicitly, to the
  exclusion of (focus on) the other.  I don't know any actual end-users for
  whom NT is the best choice, myself, and all the people I know who say
  they think NT is best for end-users don't know any particular person for
  which this even _might_ be true, either, but it _has_ been optimized for
  _some_ concept of "end-user", and Linux continues to be optimal for
  programmers or at least end-users-who-aren't-afraid-of-programmers.

| I hope to go a long way on free software.  I even hope to make money
| on it!  Mostly I hope to have fun with it.  Linux is fun.  NT isn't.

  I honestly think you should forget making money on free software, and
  regard it as luck if it happens.  the very concept is basically flawed:
  masses of people will never pay for support, but they _will_ pay more for
  upgrades than for the original product, which might as well come for
  free.  quality software does not sell in volumes, and free software is
  generally high quality software.

  instead, aim for making the software you write for commercial clients
  free after a certain period.  my clients have accepted that general-
  purpose components that I build half on their time and half on my own
  time to get the desired functionality for their use, may be re-used and
  publicly released as I see fit, but no sooner than six months after the
  system has stabilized.