4 ms·
> The memo warns that the quality of free software can meet or exceed that of commercial programs and describes it as a potentially serious threat to Microsoft.
by tap-snap-or-nap 3y ago
> The memo warns that the quality of free software can meet or exceed that of commercial programs and describes it as a potentially serious threat to Microsoft.
Every industry seems to have gone through a similar cycles where the free has been a threat to the commercial products.
- krisoft 3y ago> Every industry seems to have gone through a similar cycles where the free has been a threat to the commercial products. I’m very doubtfull of that. How would a free car manufacturer work? Which free watch offering threatened the commercial industry? When did free construction threaten commercial offerings?
- dijit 3y agoCars are a good example because "free" car manufacture is what caused the downfall of Detroit in the US and Coventry in the UK. Suddenly there was an influx of these cheaper cars, and at least in the US there were measures introduced to decrease the viability of imported cars. Free construction has a similar fate, which is why planning permission is more difficult than it has ever been.
- qubex 3y agoHow are cars that one has to pay for ‘free’?
- dijit 3y agoLibre vs Gratis. That FOSS software is given gratis is a happy byproduct of it being libre and having zero cost to copy. "open source" cola for example is not free to manufacture, so it has some cost associated, though you could make it yourself if you had the means.[0] [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-source_cola https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-source_cola
- qubex 3y agoI didn’t even know that existed, and have never tried it, and wouldn’t know where to begin looking for it. Meanwhile Coca-Cola…
- krisoft 3y agoCheaper cars are not free. They are not even “free”. > Free construction has a similar fate, which is why planning permission is more difficult than it has ever been. This is new to me. Planning permissions are difficult because the rulling class makes their money from owning property, and thus they prefer to keep the housing supply thight, and their wallets thick. They would do this even if the cost of construction would have increased. (Which it often did.)
- vidarh 3y agoPlenty of places where large developers sit on and let planning permissions expire and apply again because it's better return on investment to hoard land and first build and sell finished properties when an investor wants to exit. I live in London, and there are buildings approved with an aggregate of many thousands of flats immediately surrounding my local station alone where nothing has happened for years, because why would they, when delaying the actual construction means they effectively get extra leverage on their investment. As long as house prices rise fairly consistently, if you can raise additional capital chances are good it will give you better return to keep accumulating more land than use the capital to finance construction on land you already own. I'd really like to see heavy taxation on underutilized land (insufficient to only go after unused land because then they'll just plonk down something cheap and low-density and rent it out until the time is right for something bigger.
- Zak 3y agoJapanese companies were making objectively better cars than the US and UK from the 1970s until pretty recently. I'm not sure how much sharing of designs between companies had to do with that; they were using better quality materials and manufacturing as well as iterating faster.
- tap-snap-or-nap 3y agoCars and car based infrastructure had a stiff competition from properly funded public transportation.
- qubex 3y ago> Every industry seems to have gone through a similar cycle where the free has been a threat to the commercial products. This is hilariously out of touch. Software is one of the very few industries where marginal costs of production are essentially zero. Almost everything else besides oft-derided ‘content’ requires the expenditure of variable costs (materials, energy, labour) to produce. It’s well-known that in the limit of a perfect competition environment (think scissors, white t-shirts, socks, pencils, plate glass, & cetera) sales price is driven down towards the marginal cost (variable costs) of the most efficient producer, eliminating profit. Very few other categories of things have seen their sales prices be driven towards actual zero. In fact I’m hard-pressed to think of any.
- akdor1154 3y ago> In fact I’m hard-pressed to think of any. Maybe music and video entertainment as a counter example? Agree with everything you said though.
- qubex 3y agoThose were the “much derided ‘content’” I mentioned.
- sparrowInHand 3y agoThats the whole china buisness model? No IP costs, subsidize production to market dominance, repeat. Which again the VCs copy by subsidizing that take-over money with shareholder money Free is a temporary attack vector, but with open source its a permanent attack vector.
- qubex 3y agoWhat you’re described is just the logic behind patents eventually expiring.
- sparrowInHand 3y agoSo open source for VC take-over endavours functions like a tax. Eventually the money for bribery/free_stuff runs out, the old buisness patterns return, open source reconquers the niche. Nature is healing..