<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
Ron, you have some serious misconceptions about what is 'Free'
software:<br>
<br>
<dl>
<dd><font size="-1">A) If xyz organization or entity or person or
group wants to develop complex software, and if they don't
have access to tens of thousands of hours of free labor, and
if that development will cost millions or billions of dollars,
then the developer CANNOT develop the software.</font></dd>
<dd><br>
</dd>
</dl>
Free software often costs money. This does not make it less free.
We are refering to freedom, not to price. As an example, it will
cost you at least $349 to run Red Hat Enterprise Linux on a server
for one year: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.redhat.com/wapps/store/catalog.html">https://www.redhat.com/wapps/store/catalog.html</a>. As
you can see following that link, the price can rise dramatically
from there. RHEL is still 'free' software. RHEL, is of course also
repackaged as CentOS, which happens to gratis as well, but if you
want to run the supported, branded version, you will pay. <br>
<br>
This is a perfectly viable business model. For the three months
ending 8/31/2013, Red Hat had a net income of $40.81 Million USD on
gross revenue of $374.42 million. Net income is what is left after
paying their staff and other expenses. The financial picture, of
course is more complicated that just income and expense, but this
hardly detracts from the point. Indeed, their cash flow statement
shows a positive net change in cash for the quarter of $109.71
million.
(<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.google.com/finance?q=NYSE%3ARHT&fstype=ii&ei=mJddUtCyHoy10AGukgE">http://www.google.com/finance?q=NYSE%3ARHT&fstype=ii&ei=mJddUtCyHoy10AGukgE</a>)<br>
<dl>
<dd><font size="-1"> B) Furthermore, in the above conditions, even
if they have the deep pockets to absorb the cost, they
probably will not have enough incentive to develop the
software without a profit motive. </font></dd>
</dl>
<p>See above. For a hundred million dollars in additional cash, I
would be more than motivated.<br>
</p>
<dl>
<dt><br>
</dt>
<dd> <font size="-1">I think there's room for both FOSS and
commercial software in the world.</font></dd>
</dl>
<p>Agreed. The ability to charge, however, is not a particularly
valid reason.<br>
</p>
<dl>
<dd><font size="-1"> I want that to be rigorously designed by
highly trained engineers working in a cohesive manner and
thoroughly tested. </font></dd>
</dl>
<p>This is exactly the point with Red Hat's (and plenty of other
FOSS companies') business model. You may run CentOS for free, but
they will not support you. What you are paying for <i>is</i> the
support. Many closed source vendors charge separately for the
license to run the software and for the support contract. Since
more of their revenue often comes from support than from licenses,
it is valid to question whether they are actually helping their
bottom line by restricting the dissemination of their product.
Sadly it is common to conflate the license and support contact
into a single charge, so it is difficult to sort out the extent.<br>
</p>
<p>The important thing to consider is cost, not price. A company
which closes the source of their software or distributes it under
a restrictive license is losing the chance to have its work
reviewed. Much as the scientific community relies on peer review
to determine the merit of a published study, free software
benefits from the ability of others to correct your mistakes, or
even to make improvements which you did not have the time,
foresight, or ability to implement yourself. In terms of
security, audit of code will reveal flaws. This allows
vulnerabilities to be closed before they can become a more serious
security threat. These benefits are not available if the source
is closed, and are difficult to capitalize when the license is
restrictive. This loss of opportunity is a cost which is likely
to outweigh any benefit obtained from secrecy.<br>
</p>
<dl>
<dt>--<br>
</dt>
</dl>
<div class="moz-signature">
<table border="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td> <img src="cid:part1.09000204.00010201@naunetcorp.com"
alt="Naunet Corporation Logo"> </td>
<td> David M. Raker<br>
<br>
Director<br>
<strong>Naunet Corporation</strong><br>
☎ (678) 287-0693 x131 or (888) NAUNET1 x131<br>
<br>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
</body>
</html>