scott wrote:
> I'd disagree with that, in fact it's almost the opposite.  IME OSS seems 
> to be driven by individual developers doing whatever they feel like 
> doing whenever they feel like it, they have no requirement to implement 
> certain features or to be ready by a certain date.

There are different kinds of OSS.

Something like GCC or emacs (or POV) is going to be driven by developers who 
need their tools.

Something like Open Office is written by a company that doesn't really do 
software for a living, but instead wants to undercut the software of a 
competitor. In this case, Sun trying to sell Sparcstations without Microsoft 
eating their lunch.

Something like Blender is software that was originally in-house until the 
developers thought it would be more valuable to make it open source, 
primarily because their business changed. (In this case, their business 
changed to "out of business", but other changes work too.)

> Users benefit from DRM by getting the same product for cheaper, it's 
> just most don't realise this.

That's the assumption. I am not sure one can tell if it's right or not.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".

Post a reply to this message