From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: a07f3367d7,e276c1ed16429c03 X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,UTF8 Path: g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!feeder.news-service.com!de-l.enfer-du-nord.net!feeder1.enfer-du-nord.net!gegeweb.org!aioe.org!not-for-mail From: =?utf-8?Q?Yannick_Duch=C3=AAne_=28Hibou57?= =?utf-8?Q?=29?= Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Ada is getting more popular! Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2010 01:29:47 +0200 Organization: Ada @ Home Message-ID: References: <4cc4cb65$0$6985$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arcor-online.net> <5086cc5e-cd51-4222-a977-06bdb4fb3430@u10g2000yqk.googlegroups.com> <14fkqzngmbae6.zhgzct559yc.dlg@40tude.net> <8732ea65-1c69-4160-9792-698c5a2e8615@g13g2000yqj.googlegroups.com> <4cc60705$0$23764$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> NNTP-Posting-Host: o1huFJB2ANcHlWoNFASSiA.user.speranza.aioe.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: Quoted-Printable X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2 User-Agent: Opera Mail/10.63 (Win32) Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:14763 Date: 2010-10-26T01:29:47+02:00 List-Id: Le Tue, 26 Oct 2010 00:39:01 +0200, Thomas L=C3=B8cke a = =C3=A9crit: > I've been buying and using both closed and open source software since = = > the mid 90's, and I can tell you that, in general, the quality of open= = > source software is much higher than it's closed counterpart. > > Much. Higher. > > Let me give you a few examples: > > [Summary: Cisco and MS application are not so good] That is just one example opposed to another, we may go nowhere like this= . = What is worth, is processes and to understand why this or that leads to = = this or that (not something like I/I-want-to believe that or that). This= = already has been answered : MS is a monopole. I do not know enough about= = Cisco and the market share inb the network hardware area, but as I read = = you, I may guess Cisco has a so big market share that it does not feel t= he = need to do better (someone may confirm or infirm). In the area of particular facts opposed to other particular facts, I cou= ld = oppose Windows ease of use or MacOS hight quality UI to Linux desktop, a= s = well as I could oppose Opera to FireFox, or Borland Turbo Pascal to GNU = = Pascal, and so on. That will never prove close is better than open or op= en = is better than close. Talking about processes (if things are like they are, there must be a = process which leads to it, isn't it ?), the hypothesis that a monopole = tends to care less seems to explain more things to me. While the debate = = close vs open does not, as any one could always cite counter examples (a= s = I just did), which means this is not relevant (a theory is not relevant = if = it cannot predict anything). > Open source matters to a lot of us, even though we don't personally = > audit every line of code. What's important, is that we have the freedo= m = > to do so. We have the freedom to both fix bugs and add functionality t= o = > the software we use. We have the freedom to hire one or more programme= rs = > and add features and/or fix problems. What you qualify =E2=80=9Ca lot=E2=80=9D, is actually a few compared to = the personal area = and the overall count of users of computers. I maintain the point this i= s = no more than 95/98% of consumers. > I've contributed to the AdaCore AWS project, and I've done so because = I = > had an itch that needed scratching. If my contribution helps someone = > else do something of value with AWS, then YAY! Yes, but you were helped in return : pretty sure you were salary of a = company. But ask others which could not get a job due to social dumping,= = or to someone trying to create something and to whom people said =E2=80=9C= don't = sell you software unless you want to be evil, give it for free instead a= nd = try to get earn given it for free and selling t-shirt labeled I Love = SoftXYZ=E2=80=9D. Is the value of a software in a t-shirt ? In ads ? In = the = request to solve troubles which comes with it ? > I'd like to see some hard numbers backing up those two claims. Would be difficult, there are all dead. On the other hand, I see a lot o= f = attempt which fails, and not because the software is not good, just = because consumers want it for nothing, because some one tell them =E2=80= =9Cif = someone ask you earn for a software, he/she is evil, insist to get it fo= r = nothing=E2=80=9D and justified this with a =E2=80=9Cthe value of a softw= are is in the cost = of the copying process, if copying cost nothing, then the soft should co= st = nothing=E2=80=9D. Does really the value of a software is in the cost of = its copy ? = You guess now why using C or Ada does not bother a lot of developer, and= = why even C may look more attractive=E2=80=A6 what ever, =E2=80=9Cthe val= ue is in the cost = of the copying process=E2=80=9D, as said someone. More than that, the ISP, which does not create anything has more rights = = than the authors. The one who create the thing and must provide the copy= = for free has less rights than the one which transport the copy. Did you = = ever heard someone ISP does not offer the service for free ? And to say even more, its even worse than the belief =E2=80=9Cthe value = is in the = cost of the copy=E2=80=9D : hosting a download server does not cost noth= ing. Do = you know a lot of consumer which agree to give for that ? It even goes a= = step further. Any other questions ? Still have a doubt ? Know someone who could get so= me = right in such a context ? > Open source does not mean that an author gives up his copyright, nor = > does it mean that he can't sell his software. The GPL is actually known as the source of one of the biggest license he= ll = (was a topic on the french CLA about it). The author must give the consumer the right to redistribute for free. = Guess what the consumer gonna do ? Guess how this will end for the autho= r = ? The author cannot expect to do say 1000 sells for $20 or $50, because = as = soon as he will sell the first one copy for $20 or $50, he will not sell= a = second one. So he must do one sell for 1000 * $20, that is $2000. But wh= om = consumer gonna agree to paid the big price ? Do you think they gonna wan= t = to be the one who paid the big price or the all other one who get the fr= ee = copy ? And that is how things go. > Open source does not equal free, as in free beer. I pay for each and = > every Slackware release and I often donate to open source projects tha= t = > are valuable to me. I'm sure other users do the same. How many people do that ? 0.0001% ? Its all about destructive economy, just like the destruction of European= = economy with Chinese imports, or the destruction of the African economy = = with massive European exports (at a so much low cost that it killed the = = African local economy). You promise the big affair (free), but that is f= or = the short run, as on the long run, every one become poorer and poorer. You talk about free, but you are probably a salary. See the paradox ? -- = Si les chats miaulent et font autant de vocalises bizarres, c=E2=80=99es= t pas pour = les chiens.