[Fsf-friends] Basics...

[Sriharsha Vedurmudi]

Dear All,

    being new to this '/Free/' world and following the debate between 
Mr.Sasi and Mr. Raman, I am unable to find answers to a few questions 
(about the movement). Accepted I have not tried too hard to search the 
net for answers. I'd appreciate if anyone answers, but its ok even 
otherwise.

1. /Free Software/ implies that the software is open for anyone and 
everyone, right from its conceptual phase all through its life-cycle.

    Its just like a person saying "Hey, I got this idea and Im trying to 
build this system, any one interested to lend a hand?". If someone is 
interested, they either team up with the original thinker or (if the 
system is still in conceptual phase) start developing on their own but 
leave the latest progress at a common place for anyone to 
see/modify/(delete?) :-) . Once the work reaches a stage where is can 
stand out, it is put for the public (probably only see/modify/download).

    All through these phases, not a single person gains anything in 
terms of money (Im not in favor of minting money, per se). So, our 
professional satisfaction apart, how will this benifit a common 
programmer/software developer? Im afraid I have not understood how 
companies are expected to survive if they cannot charge for the efforts 
put in, in order to make the software qualified as Free Software. So, it 
is only the companies who develop custom solutions to other firms (just 
because the other firms cannot do it on their own either due to lack of 
in-house expertise or facilities) that can charge for the software.

    Writing the above lines I feel, A company developing custom software 
for clients (and charging for the same), can in-turn contribute a part 
of their profits to fund developers working on free software. In turn 
the company can simply use the free s/w developed by these developers to 
develop their own s/w for customers. Is this the essence of Free 
Software in a nut shell?

Regards,
Sriharsha.

Ramanraj K wrote:

> Ragavan Srinivasan wrote:
>   > [snip]
>
> "Open Source" terminology is more troublesome than what the OSI can
> handle ;)
>
> Someone at ILUGC pointed to the link:
>
> http://www.cnn.com/2004/BUSINESS/09/19/microsoft.program.ap/index.html
>
> "Microsoft opens up code program"
>
> is not the same as
>
> "Microsoft frees up program code"
>
> "Open Source" is an hopeless expression that cannot legally, correctly
> or directly distinguish free from non-free software, without elaborate
> and contrived definitions.  Of course, we cannot expect OSI people to
> abandon their "Open Source" terminology this evening, but they would
> have to write long essays why MS is not "Open Source", and hope OSI
> thinks of some other better expression . Have fun :)
>
> "Free Software" is without ambiguity or overapplicability:
> http://mm.gnu.org.in/pipermail/fsf-friends/2003-November/001255.html
> http://mm.gnu.org.in/pipermail/fsf-friends/2003-November/001261.html
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Fsf-friends mailing list
> Fsf-friends@mm.gnu.org.in
> http://mm.gnu.org.in/mailman/listinfo/fsf-friends