From: Mike '/m' 

On Sat, 17 May 2003 09:22:05 -0500, "Joe Barr"
 wrote:

>On Fri, 16 May 2003 19:34:28 -0400, Geo. wrote:
>
>> "Adam Flinton"  wrote in message
>> news:3ec3e9f0$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>>
>>> Yup... In the EU we have anti-predatory pricing laws......
>>
>> question: when competing against a free product (linux) do they even
>> apply?
>>
>> Geo.
>
>The perfect time to remind you that Linux is free as in speech, not free
>as in beer.
>
>:)


And a very good point indeed.  At this point, I've pretty much settled upon
SuSe linux for my future home desktop workstation.  I'll be buying the
disks from SuSe because of the extra stuff on the disks that is not in the
download version.  Also, I buy each new version of OpenBSD for my firewall
and FreeBSD for my servers, even though they are available without charge
for download.

My point is that I do not use the Open Source software because it is
available for no charge, I use it because the developers are more concerned
about me and my needs as a customer.

Microsoft views me merely as a pawn to be sold to Microsoft's real
customers, e.g., the media companies using Windows media servers.  Much as
magazines sell the attention of their readers to the magazines'
advertisers.  When Bill Gates visits the RIAA and or the MPAA he can boast
how many desktops he can deliver if they media people use Microsoft's
proprietary media  formats.

Additionally, I've found the Open Source software to be more stable,
reliable, better supported, and a whole lot more efficient in the use of
computer resources.

So I don't mind paying for the software I use, even if I can download it for free.

 /m

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-4