XPost: uk.d-i-y   
   From: Andrew97d@btinternet.com   
      
   On 30/03/2025 09:58, wasbit wrote:   
   > On 30/03/2025 07:19, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:   
   >> On Sat, 29 Mar 2025 14:01:40 +0000, John Rumm wrote:   
   >>   
   >>> However keep in mind that paying for software from commercial vendors   
   >>> like MS also pays for large swathes of the "free" software you might   
   >>> otherwise choose, since many of those developers can only afford to   
   >>> donate time to open source projects only because they have income from a   
   >>> "money grabbing" software vendor.   
   >>   
   >> If only that were true. Most of those money-grabbing businesses are too   
   >> willing to take and not give back.   
   >>   
   >> Then we have those users who complain about Free software not being as   
   >> good as the proprietary stuff. If they would divert some of the money   
   >> they   
   >> give to the proprietary vendors and give it to the Free software   
   >> developers, think how much better those products could be.   
   >>   
   >   
   > Why don't you apply that argument to car manufacturers? They make a   
   > number of variations of the same car.   
   >   
   > I have always been grateful for free software.   
   >   
   > It's backward thinking & greedy to expect the best of everything for   
   > free just because it's available.   
   >   
   >   
      
   And the fact that 20% of new cars are supplied by Motabilty sort   
   of confirms that when it comes to 'free' the British are experts   
   at freeloading off others.   
      
   --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)