www-commits
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

www/philosophy free-world.html


From: Yavor Doganov
Subject: www/philosophy free-world.html
Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2007 20:38:56 +0000

CVSROOT:        /web/www
Module name:    www
Changes by:     Yavor Doganov <yavor>   07/04/13 20:38:56

Modified files:
        philosophy     : free-world.html 

Log message:
        Templated; added a note that it is from "Third Party Ideas".

CVSWeb URLs:
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/free-world.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.3&r2=1.4

Patches:
Index: free-world.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/free-world.html,v
retrieving revision 1.3
retrieving revision 1.4
diff -u -b -r1.3 -r1.4
--- free-world.html     31 Mar 2007 15:30:37 -0000      1.3
+++ free-world.html     13 Apr 2007 20:38:36 -0000      1.4
@@ -1,122 +1,114 @@
-<html>
-<head>
+<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
 <title>Only the Free World Can Stand Up to Microsoft</title>
-</head>
-<body background="moss.gif">
-<center><h2>Only the Free World Can Stand Up to Microsoft</h2>
-<b>by Tom Hull</b></center>
-<hr>
-<hr>
-<p>
-[ <A HREF="/philosophy/free-world.zh-cn.html">Chinese(Simplified)</A>
-| <A HREF="/philosophy/free-world.zh-tw.html">Chinese(Traditional)</A>
-| <A HREF="/philosophy/free-world.html">English</A>
-| <A HREF="/philosophy/free-world.fr.html">French</A>
-]
-<p>
+<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
+<h2>Only the Free World Can Stand Up to Microsoft</h2>
+
+<p>by <strong>Tom Hull</strong></p>
+
+<div class="announcement">
+<blockquote><p>This article is part of our section
+of <a href="/philosophy/philosophy.html#thirdparty">Third Party
+Ideas</a>.</p></blockquote>
+</div>
 
 <ol>
-<li>
-The reproduction and distribution cost of software is zero at
+<li>The reproduction and distribution cost of software is zero at
 the margin. This means that in theory it is no more
 expensive to produce software which can be freely distributed and
 used by everybody than it is to produce software for a limited
-clientele.
-
-<p><li>The pricing of software bears no relationship to the cost of its
+clientele.</li>
+<br />
+<li>The pricing of software bears no relationship to the cost of its
 development. The two factors that do matter are market size (which
 is limited by price and utility) and competition. Given a market
 for a software product, the maximum margin can be obtained by
-precluding or eliminating competition.
-
-<p><li>Software companies that are able to thwart competition attain
+precluding or eliminating competition.</li>
+<br />
+<li>Software companies that are able to thwart competition attain
 pinnacles of power which are inconceivable in other industries.
-Partly this is due to the enormous cash flows that are possible
-in the absence of competition from products with nil reproduction
-costs, but largely it is due to the complexity of software itself,
-which allows dominant companies to design "standards" which exclude
-future competition.
-
-<p><li>All niche markets for software rapidly evolve toward monopoly or
+Partly this is due to the enormous cash flows that are possible in the
+absence of competition from products with nil reproduction costs, but
+largely it is due to the complexity of software itself, which allows
+dominant companies to design &ldquo;standards&rdquo; which exclude
+future competition.</li>
+<br />
+<li>All niche markets for software rapidly evolve toward monopoly or
 an equilibrium where a small number of players tacitly agree not
 to mutually destroy their profits. (Established companies can
 defend their market share by reducing their prices to practically
 nothing, making price competition suicidal for newcomers.) However,
 there are cases of asymetrical competition, where a large company
 with other sources of income can destroy a smaller company that
-depends on a single niche revenue stream.
-
-<p><li>Microsoft has a secure revenue stream based on its dominant
-position in personal computer operating systems software, and uses
-the power inherent in that position to favor its other business
-activities with its ability to dictate "standards" and to undermine
-competition, especially where power (as opposed to mere money) is
-at stake.
-
-<p><li>Capitalists invest in new software ventures with the hope of
+depends on a single niche revenue stream.</li>
+<br />
+<li>Microsoft has a secure revenue stream based on its dominant
+position in personal computer operating systems software, and uses the
+power inherent in that position to favor its other business activities
+with its ability to dictate &ldquo;standards&rdquo; and to undermine
+competition, especially where power (as opposed to mere money) is at
+stake.</li>
+<br />
+<li>Capitalists invest in new software ventures with the hope of
 gaining a dominant position in a new niche market. There is 
 essentially no new investment in existing niche markets, since it
 is impossible to compete with an established dominant player on
 the basis of lower costs and the possible gains of an uphill
 battle for a small share of a shrinking pie rarely justify the
 risks. In their wildest dreams these capitalists want nothing so
-much as to be just like Microsoft.
-
-<p><li>The drive to restrain Microsoft under the rubric of antitrust law
+much as to be just like Microsoft.</li>
+<br />
+<li>The drive to restrain Microsoft under the rubric of antitrust law
 seems mostly to be the effort of companies who find their own power
 positions threatened by Microsoft's activities. They seek to make
 it harder for Microsoft to undermine their own businesses. However,
 they are fundamentally similar to Microsoft in that they don't
 question a world where technology companies working from private
 caches of intellectual property are able to control the use of that
-technology for their own best profit.
-
-<p><li>In the market equation, demand is equal to, and in many ways the
+technology for their own best profit.</li>
+<br />
+<li>In the market equation, demand is equal to, and in many ways the
 master of, production. Yet in the world we live in, production is
 highly organized and efficient and commands enormous financial
 resources and seductive powers of persuasion, while demand is
-fragmented, uninformed, and powerless. While consumers can still
-kill a product that they have no desire for,
-they are nearly powerless to direct or even influence the
-detailed designs of those products.
-For
+fragmented, uninformed, and powerless. While consumers can still kill
+a product that they have no desire for, they are nearly powerless to
+direct or even influence the detailed designs of those products.  For
 software products, consumers can only choose among a given set of
 alternatives, which are extremely complex, dauntingly impenetrable,
-and generally designed more for the company's anticompetitive
-purposes than for the user's tasks. (Even the old fashioned option
-of doing without is often impossible due to the intricate web of
-interdependencies as new hardware and software march in lock step
-into the future.)
-
-<p><li>The real "killer software" is free software: software that is
-free of intellectual property claims; that is published in source
-code form, so can be inspected, evaluated, fixed and enhanced by
-anyone with a mind to do so; that is freely distributed and can
-be installed on machines and used without limit. Free software is
-the software that kills the closed, nefarious software product
+and generally designed more for the company's anticompetitive purposes
+than for the user's tasks. (Even the old fashioned option of doing
+without is often impossible due to the intricate web of
+interdependencies as new hardware and software march in lock step into
+the future.)</li>
+<br />
+<li>The real &ldquo;killer software&rdquo; is free software: software
+that is free of intellectual property claims; that is published in
+source code form, so can be inspected, evaluated, fixed and enhanced
+by anyone with a mind to do so; that is freely distributed and can be
+installed on machines and used without limit. Free software is the
+software that kills the closed, nefarious software product
 industry. It is software that users can select intelligently, to do
-today's tasks, and which they can collaboratively build on to
-handle future needs. Free software is the one thing that not even
-Microsoft can compete with.
-
-<p><li>Still, there is one core problem: who pays for developing free
-software? The usual answer -- which leads to all of the trouble
-above -- is that investors pay for development, which they
-recover from their profits. The only real answer is that
-development costs must be paid for by users. The key point here
-is that what is paid for is not the distribution or use of the
-software, but its development, and that the development of free
-software implies that it can be used by anyone. I think there is
-a simple way to handle this: anyone who wants a piece of software
-developed or enhanced posts a "request-for-proposal," including a
-sum that the requester is willing to contribute towards its
-development. Intermediary organizations can pool these requests,
-and interested parties can up the ante. Developers can then
-search through the current postings and bid on development work
-or work on spec. Developers can also post their own proposals,
-which users can then buy into.
-
-<p><li>Free software can be developed less expensively than closed
+today's tasks, and which they can collaboratively build on to handle
+future needs. Free software is the one thing that not even Microsoft
+can compete with.</li>
+<br />
+<li>Still, there is one core problem: who pays for developing free
+software? The usual answer &mdash; which leads to all of the trouble
+above &mdash; is that investors pay for development, which they
+recover from their profits. The only real answer is that development
+costs must be paid for by users. The key point here is that what is
+paid for is not the distribution or use of the software, but its
+development, and that the development of free software implies that it
+can be used by anyone. I think there is a simple way to handle this:
+anyone who wants a piece of software developed or enhanced posts a
+&ldquo;request-for-proposal,&rdquo; including a sum that the requester
+is willing to contribute towards its development. Intermediary
+organizations can pool these requests, and interested parties can up
+the ante. Developers can then search through the current postings and
+bid on development work or work on spec. Developers can also post
+their own proposals, which users can then buy into.</li>
+<br />
+<li>Free software can be developed less expensively than closed
 software products. Even for well paid professional developers,
 fully underwritten by conscientious users, the cost of free
 software would be significantly less than the premiums now being
@@ -126,45 +118,101 @@
 utility and quality. The service component of software would also
 open up: anyone who wanted to could start from the same code, to
 learn, support, and teach. The best service providers would
-succeed.
-
-<p><li>Simple steps can get this movement underway: Form an initial
+succeed.</li>
+<br />
+<li>Simple steps can get this movement underway: Form an initial
 organization to sort out the technical issues, suggest working
-arrangements, study the economics, hack out a legal framework,
-seed and coordinate the requests, and canvas for initial technology
+arrangements, study the economics, hack out a legal framework, seed
+and coordinate the requests, and canvas for initial technology
 contributions (including the large body of currently available
 freeware), do some evangelical work. Urge large companies and
 organizations to budget a small fraction of their annual software
-outlays for proposals. Set up a review group for intellectual
-property issues, challenge dubious claims, and investigate the
-feasibility of buying and releasing rights to valid claims.
-Encourage the development of more local organizations -- local to
-place, to industry, to niche, to taste -- with the initial group
-breaking up or fading away: common methods and procedures, but no
-centralized control.
-
-<p><li>Let's call this organization, this whole framework, "The Free
-World." It stands for free and open knowledge, free and open
-development, software that works for you. Take a stand. Make a
-contribution. You have nothing to lose but CTL-ALT-DEL.
+outlays for proposals. Set up a review group for intellectual property
+issues, challenge dubious claims, and investigate the feasibility of
+buying and releasing rights to valid claims.  Encourage the
+development of more local organizations &mdash; local to place, to
+industry, to niche, to taste &mdash; with the initial group breaking
+up or fading away: common methods and procedures, but no centralized
+control.</li>
+<br />
+<li>Let's call this organization, this whole framework, &ldquo;The
+Free World.&rdquo; It stands for free and open knowledge, free and
+open development, software that works for you. Take a stand. Make a
+contribution. You have nothing to lose
+but <kbd>CTL-ALT-DEL</kbd>.</li>
 </ol>
-<hr>
-Copyright 1997 Tom Hull. You may link to this document and/or
-redistribute it electronically.
+
+<hr />
+
+<p>Additional notes can be found
+at <a href="/philosophy/free-world-notes.html">
+http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-world-notes.html</a>.</p>
+
+</div>
+
+<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
+<div id="footer">
+
 <p>
-The latest version of this file is available at:
-<p><ul>
-<p><li><a href="free-world.html">
-http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-world.html</a>
-</ul>
+Please send questions and comments regarding this specific page to Tom
+Hull <a href="mailto:address@hidden";>&lt;address@hidden&gt;</a>.
+</p>
+
 <p>
-Additional notes can be found at:
-<p><ul>
-<p><li>
-<a href="free-world-notes.html">
-http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-world-notes.html</a>
-</ul>
+Please send FSF &amp; GNU inquiries to 
+<a href="mailto:address@hidden";><em>address@hidden</em></a>.
+There are also <a href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a> 
+the FSF.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Please see the 
+<a href="/server/standards/README.translations">Translations
+README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting
+translations of this article.
+</p>
+
 <p>
-Please email to ftwalk @ contex.com.
+Copyright &copy; 1997 Tom Hull 
+<br />You may link to this document and/or redistribute it
+electronically.
+</p>
+
+<p>
+Updated:
+<!-- timestamp start -->
+$Date: 2007/04/13 20:38:36 $
+<!-- timestamp end -->
+</p>
+</div>
+
+<div id="translations">
+<h4>Translations of this page</h4>
+
+<!-- Please keep this list alphabetical. -->
+<!-- Comment what the language is for each type, i.e. de is Deutsch.-->
+<!-- If you add a new language here, please -->
+<!-- advise address@hidden and add it to -->
+<!--  - /home/www/bin/nightly-vars either TAGSLANG or WEBLANG -->
+<!--  - /home/www/html/server/standards/README.translations.html -->
+<!--  - one of the lists under the section "Translations Underway" -->
+<!--  - if there is a translation team, you also have to add an alias -->
+<!--  to mail.gnu.org:/com/mailer/aliases -->
+<!-- Please also check you have the 2 letter language code right versus -->
+<!-- <URL:http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/IG/ert/iso639.htm> -->
+<!-- Please use W3C normative character entities -->
+
+<ul class="translations-list">
+<!-- English -->
+<li><a href="/philosophy/free-world.html">English</a>&nbsp;[en]</li>
+<!-- French -->
+<li><a href="/philosophy/free-world.fr.html">Fran&#x00e7;ais</a>&nbsp;[fr]</li>
+<!-- Chinese (Simplified) -->
+<li><a 
href="/philosophy/free-world.zh-cn.html">&#x7b80;&#x4f53;&#x4e2d;&#x6587;</a>&nbsp;[zh-cn]</li>
+<!-- Chinese (Traditional) -->
+<li><a 
href="/philosophy/free-world.zh-tw.html">&#x7e41;&#x9ad4;&#x4e2d;&#x6587;</a>&nbsp;[zh-tw]</li>
+</ul>
+</div>
+</div>
 </body>
 </html>




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]