11 Aug
2007
11 Aug
'07
2:05 p.m.
[...], I can tell you from personal experience that
there is a strong
perception that "all things Linux should be free" - I sold cross
development tools for many years (still do actually), and I've been
asked about Linix versions many times - I don't think I ever was
asked if I'd sell Linux tools, or what they would cost etc... But
many times I got asked "how about free versions for Linux?"
It occurs to me that this phrasing may to an extent be putting cause
and effect the wrong way around: that the sort of person who is
unwilling to pay for software will (tend to) gravitate to Linux, rather
than people feeling (or tending to feel) that if it's for Linux it
therefore should be free.
Of course, there isn't much difference between the two from a pragmatic
vendor point of view. (I also could be totally off base; I have no
data to back up either position, and this speculation really is
speculating in a vacuum in that regard.) The only personal experience
I have is anecdotal; someone I knew created a Windows program, and I
asked if he'd mind if I built a version for non-Windows. He said,
basically, "if it won't eat into Windows sales, feel free".
/~\ The ASCII der Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
X Against HTML mouse at rodents.montreal.qc.ca
/ \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B