[Patents] re: Article is free software worth the cost.

[Nick Fleming marmalade@x-stream.co.uk]

My respose to the following article: (Original article in quotes)

http://www.microsoft.com/Mind/0599/flux/flux0599.htm

I dont want to get into a slagging match, but your article contains some 
serious errors
which you should be aware of :

"The latest trendy thing in software circles is actually a revival of an old 
dream: software,
freely written and distributed, with accompanying source code available for 
all to see and modify.
"
This is not a dream, its a sound way of doing business. Many customers like 
the security of being
able to modify  and maintain the code long after the original company has 
either ceased trading or
left the market. Its also a great way of getting them to fix your bugs for 
you.

"This allows other programmers to make contributions to the code and pass it 
on, again for free. "

The act of writing the code isnt the problem, and its something that 
Microsoft has not apparently
understood. Most customers dont care about code - they just want a finished 
product. By sharing
code you are simply helping others in the same industry - not necessarily 
helping the competition
but other programmers. And guess what ? The amazing thing is when you do 
this, others give you
back stuff that you can use to add value to your customers software.

"While free distribution is a great marketing tool (think about all those 
samples you get in the mail),
what does it say about the product itself? Frankly, it says that the product 
(or the effort that went
into making the product) has no value. Is that what you software engineers 
out there want?
"

No value ? Ever heard of JPEG ? PNG ? gzip ? mature technologies that have 
been in use for years - all totally free

"The software industry is unusual because it incurs high development costs, 
but has almost no production costs.
It has survived and thrives today-even if the business model does drive 
accountants crazy-by pricing the
product to cover the development and maintenance cost in addition to some 
margin to provide a bit of profit for the company.
"

True,  most of the costs are labour costs. This should imply that we're in a 
service industry, not a manufacturing
one - big deal.

"If, however, you gave away all software, how would you pay the creators of 
that software? You destroy the subtle motives
that only cash can bring-motives such as food on the table, a warm place to 
sleep, and so forth.
"

You charge a fee for the service of writing the software - or for a 
distrubution / shrink wrapped package. And I
have news for you - I aint doing this for the money. Id have studied law if I 
wanted to be rich. I do this for FUN.
John Carmack (of Quake fame) tells everyone how he writes his software - is 
he poor ? I don't think so. By the
way, cash aint a subtle motive.

"..need to have real jobs to make ends meet. Are these the type of people you 
want developing the software products your business
depends on?
"

FUD alert ! So,  JPEG is  unstable is it ? If so, why do Microsoft use code 
based heavily on the IJG work ? Hmm ?

"This isn't to say that some, if not a fair majority, of the current "free" 
software out there isn't good. In fact, some is
downright great.
But most of this software was created by students and folks in academia."

How can you say this when Microsofts own record is so crap ? Look at Visual C 
for example - the files are not
backwardly compatible from one version to the next . Same goes for Office 97. 
In NT 4 you can uninstall every
thing without root privileges but it wont let you re install them. Dearie 
dearie me... and MS calls Linux unsecure.
Bugs in your TCP/IP stacks. NT 5 has had so many bugs in it that its been 
delayed for over 2 years.
Academia is responsible for a number of software sucesses. Look at BSD Unix - 
still going strong long after
Windows 3.11 has been dead and buried.  Im in industry and I write free 
software by the way - so are a lot
of others. Thats why the stuff is so good - its written by professionals.

"Ironically, these folks are sowing the seeds of their own destruction. If 
they actually succeed in making software free,
no one will be willing to employ them to create a product with no value. 
Soon, students will stop studying software
development in college since there won't be a way to make a career out of it."

I went into this industry when software was free. It still is for the most 
part. Water is basically free, yet you
still buy it from somewhere. The software industry should switch track to a 
service industry rather than
a manufacturing one. Your statement about no careers is pure hogwash.

" All those young, eager students will have to turn to something less 
respectable, like studying law. "

Without law, someone can legally smash your face in and get away with it. Duh 
!

Richard Stallman, creator of the Free Software Foundation (FSF), has promoted 
free software for years, and is the
mind behind many of the GNU software tools. The FSF has even created a legal 
tool they call "copyleft" to protect
the freedom of their software. A product that is copylefted is copyrighted, 
but can be modified by anyone as long as
they don't charge for their contributions. The source code for the new 
changes must be made available for others to see and learn
from.
"

So are you against learning then ? If people are going to go into education 
for lucrative careers then they should
be able to learn from the best examples available - and they should rightly 
be freely available. Would you deny
your children access to a decent education ?

"The FSF position is that software is more akin to speech than a physical 
product to be sold. That's a noble concept. for the
nineteenth century. "

Its a noble concept in any century and two world wars have been fought (in 
this century) at the cost of
many lives to preserve it. Its not the software you are selling, but a 
service. People (usually) buy your
software to help them do something, not to hang above the mantlepiece.

"In fact, if you take Stallman's position to the logical conclusion, all 
intellectual property-from patents, to
 books, to music and art-should be free. If intellectual property isn't 
property, then just what is property?
Why not just give away cars, houses, and everything else? "

Why not. In England they are giving away TV's and charging to watch the 
programs. You could do it with cars -
just charge for maintainace and fuel, servicing and insurance. Your 'logical 
conclusion' is pathetic and is devoid
of all economic, mathematical moral and social reasoning.

"With all the talk about freely shareable source and not charging for 
software, it's ironic that Stallman, the
godfather of open-source, free software, and a recipient of a MacArthur 
"genius" grant for his work in this
 area, is starting to complain about Linux, the most visible free software 
available today. Stallman has reportedly
 said that since Linux uses many GNU tools, it should be called "GNU-Linux." 
I'm sure Richard is correct, but it brings up an
interesting dilemma. "

"If software is free, why does it matter who takes credit for it? After all, 
aren't we all just one big, happy family
 contributing to a great, shared codebase for all of humankind? "

Nice thought, I like that idea - everyone being nice to each other for a 
change instead of fighting petty wars.

"Why should it matter that someone uses some code from someone else? The way 
I see it, "credit," better known as
fame, is just another method of payment. If the big kahuna of the FSF wants 
free software, he shouldn't demand the payment of fame
for its use. "

Er.. RMS doesnt demand anything. The money is made providing the service of 
distributions and possibly customisation
of the software for special purposes - The Sony Playstation uses GNU for 
instance (or is it Sega..:-) You can freely
download ALL the software from www.gnu.org or just copy it from your mates. 
The publicity is no big deal - its
called marketing your products. Its also good business sense.

"Or is it the money that's the problem? Some folks are just plain 
anticapitalist. I'm not saying that Stallman is
anticapitalist, I'm saying the whole free software movement is. But 
understand my distinction. Giving away
 software is a great marketing tool. It's hard to compete if your competition 
is free.
"

Yes it is - witness what happened to Netscape Navigator when MS gave Explorer 
4 away. Thats why it is wrong to
see the software industry as ONLY a product orientated one. If you switch to 
the service / supply models then you
can effectively 'lock' your customers in by providing higher quality service 
rather than your competitors. Are you
spotting a theme here ?

" That's something that a number of companies have discovered. Now it's 
Microsoft's turn with Windows NT versus Linux. Still,
if all software was free, none of us would have a job. "

Yes we would. Books need writing as all this stuff is complicated. 
Consultants earn a living where time and info
are scarce. Retail sells stuff to people that dont have internet access (or 
free local calls - do you object to free local
calls ? hey, if everyone had free local calls AT&T would go out of business 
yes ? - Nope, they;re still there last time
I looked.)

"In short, I'm not against software being given away. I just want the folks 
who write that software to be paid-and
paid handsomely-for writing it. That is the proper model for the industry. So 
the next time you think about using
 some free software, consider its cost to the software industry
"

So, you would rather choose to hold back the source code and the software and 
charge your customers high
fees to pay your wages. If you do, they will ALWAYS find someone who will 
sell it cheaper and better than
you. As a whole, in summary, I find your lack of business accumen astounding 
and your article very, very
poorly researched not to mention offensive to Universities and potential 
Clients. Im suprised Chairman Bill
ever let you print it.

Sorry if I seem harsh, I am not totally anti-microsoft. I jist wish they 
would stop trying to bury the
competition at the expense of their clients. (Check out the halloween docs) 
They are alienating clients and
the public alike. Ever seen the southpark movie ? The bit where they shoot 
Bill G. for releasing Windows 98 ?
Exactly.


NickF.

Nick__F@yahoo.com