4 ms·
I'm not implying these vendors should work for free. Just that they could have been more creative with the way they monetized. The way that makes most sense to
by throwaway13337 10y ago
I'm not implying these vendors should work for free. Just that they could have been more creative with the way they monetized.
The way that makes most sense to me is charging for the authoring tools and making the language/VM completely open (e.g. MIT license).
Maybe that's too idealistic?
- infinite8s 10y agoHave you tried making a living that way?
- kgwgk 10y ago> I'm not implying these vendors should work for free. You're implying that they should charge others for the parts that you don't care about? If only they had been a bit more creative...
- throwaway13337 10y agoNot at all. I used adobe's toolset for flash. Even if flash was open source completely, I'm sure the authoring tool would have been still nearly required. Keeping the underlying language open simply means that it would have been more usable and extensible.
- kgwgk 10y agoOk. I don't know anything about PyQt so if you tell me that the dual license arrangement prevents you from using and extending it, despite your willingness to pay, I'll take your word for it.