The point is that you do not see Doctors saying that payed medical services are evil.
Charitable services play an important role but they are no substitute for for-profit corporations.
May be we could learn something from the medical community. Fundamental research in biology is conducted in an open-source fashion. Drug development is by for-profit corporations.
By the same logic, open-source software community should be tackling more fundamental challenges in computing.
Somehow I don't thnk the charter for open source development should be to build clones of commercial products.
Further more, never came across lawyers, doctors or pilots making a case for their services being free.
Why should software developers offer their products for free?
On the "should" be free list, I would put health care, food and shelter far above software.
Slashdot Mirror
The point is that you do not see Doctors saying that payed medical services are evil. Charitable services play an important role but they are no substitute for for-profit corporations. May be we could learn something from the medical community. Fundamental research in biology is conducted in an open-source fashion. Drug development is by for-profit corporations. By the same logic, open-source software community should be tackling more fundamental challenges in computing. Somehow I don't thnk the charter for open source development should be to build clones of commercial products.
Further more, never came across lawyers, doctors or pilots making a case for their services being free. Why should software developers offer their products for free? On the "should" be free list, I would put health care, food and shelter far above software.
ASP.NET 2.0 is quite innovative and would be one of the reasons why develops would stick with IIS.