| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 06/21/2005 1:28:47 PM PDT by Admin Moderator, reason:
Public nuisance. |
Posted on 06/16/2005 4:49:37 PM PDT by Golden Eagle
well, i'd call you an zero sum thinker, i don't subscribe.
"Sorry but I don't follow that reasoning. Why would they advertise at all if 97% of those dollars are lost in net result?"
I downloaded JBoss a month or so back, I used it for non-profit evaluation, and then I removed it. So I may be included in the percentage of people who did not ask for follow up services. But all they have spent on me is the price of a download.
Generally it is good to do this because now that I am more familiar with their product, know what it does, and a bit about how it works, then I am more likely to recommend it as a solution to others, or even to a future employer who may want follow up services. So giving the product away free is a way of advertising it.
Reminds me of pure open source more than any proprietary software company. Those products are notoriously poorly documented, are they not? If you disagree, give some examples of open source that are better documented than their proprietary counterparts. Thanks.
"A significant portion of the manpower that creates open source software comes from the United States; so, you can think of any disclosure to the ChiComs as a net loss not only in terms of domestic technology and revenue but also as a gain by our adversaries. They get something valuable from us for nothing which increases their capabilities. That's a bad thing, in my opinion."
Can you name one aspect of Redhat Linux that presents a security concern if it falls into Chinese hands? Something that the Chinese would not be able to obtain easily otherwise. Seriously I cannot think of one thing. Its just an operating system and they teach how operating systems work all over the world.
Which would be illegal. They can't legally take IBM AIX and rename it Chinux and run their supercomputers on it. Hey, I think we should cut off all trade with them, but if trade is going to be allowed, it should at least be profitable for us and subject to export restriction, and these free copies are neither.
"Reminds me of pure open source more than any proprietary software company. Those products are notoriously poorly documented, are they not?"
That I agree with
"Which would be illegal. They can't legally take IBM AIX..."
Sorry maybe I got confused. I was talking about red hat
how would anyone, outside of the developer ever know if an proprietary program was "documented", with open source you can read it, it's open.
But you belive service only is equal to sales and service?
windows api is well documented, but of course windows is proprietry. I think thats the general idea. Course i dont know the correct terminology for that kind of thing.
But then along came Bic and turned the business inside out by making plastic razors with blades cheap enough to be disposable. Why should I spend money refilling my razor, pen or lighter when they are cheap enough to just throw away and buy new ones?
So why should I spend money on software service and support when I can get free new software from someone else?
I didn't, I asked where can I get Sensor XL's for under $6. One free razor from Schick per lifetime hardly qualifies.
Sure, it's clustering capability, which is perfectly suited for nuclear weapon design, simulation, and post simulation analysis. And they're getting that software for free, including not only the right to use, but legally rename, and even resell, without even a thank you back to the US.
The problem with your theory is, they did pay for that download and didn't get anything in return. Worse, if you had liked it, you still wouldn't have to pay for it. Worse still, if you give it to your buddies, who may like and use it too, but they don't have to pay for it either.
The model of distribution and impact to the tech economy is more similar to illegal pirated copies being distributed than anything. Especially when the admitted figure of those who use it without paying is 97%.
it is obvious that you know almost nothing about free software.
you name redhat as an example as if redhat "wrote" it.
redhat, the operating system is a "distribution" of linux.
with maybe 1 or 2 percent written by redhat personnel.
the contributions to linux are made by people from all over the world, including china.
i cannot take anything you say seriously, since you make statements that you either know to be untrue, or show your complete ignorance regarding free software.
it is *particularly* germane to this thread, as opposed to your attempts to sow Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt (along with your sad and predictable attempts to obfuscate, which shed no light at all on the subject at hand).
Name one significant chinese contributor.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.