>That's pretty dismissive of gcc, clang, linux, apache etc. "some evenings", eh? By 2000 I'd put probably $60M into gcc alone. You mean the tools that are main

>That's pretty dismissive of gcc, clang, linux, apache etc. "some evenings", eh? By 2000 I'd put probably $60M into gcc alone. You mean the tools that are maintained by huge teams in large companies, because the they are critical to the paid products or services sold by these companies? Sure, technically it's free software, but de-facto they are decentralized loss leaders behind fairly solid business models. >It just seems odd you are so casually dismissive. I'm just talking about my own expectations and experience. Aside from a few notable exceptions like the ones you mentioned, my experience with free software very often starts with googling why it doesn't work out-of-the-box (or does something completely unintended) and where to find some obscure setting to change this. > Just as you care that your car has been crash tested "under some synthetic circumstances" I care that my car has been crash tested, but I don't care if my coffee mug wasn't. There are many solid cases where security is a priority, and many others where it isn't.