Wayne Stallwood wayne.stallwood@btinternet.com wrote:
I don't care about software being closed source unless it's running on a mission critical system, It's always nice to have the source but it's not always a factor in the choices I make (espicially with desktop apps, I'm far too busy to spend time fixing them).
The issue isn't really about whether you want to fix them, but whether you have a free market in those fixes. With free software, you can ask any provider for a given fix; but with proprietary, you have a single supplier.
[...] I can actually use it without breaking the law.
Well, I keep seeing these "termination clauses" in many licences. So you may not be allowed to use it...
Being owned by a software house is no worse than being owned by the Manufactuer of your Car (to supply you with spare parts)
In addition to the free market in repairers mentioned elsewhere, there is also a near-free market in parts. For example, I use Champion wipers because I think the ones from the car's maker suck (or rather "don't wipe").
So, why isn't software like that?
BIOS doesn't really count, as that's software too (and using a problem to justify itself is "odd") and Cola is a pain, but there are some recipes out there.