20 Feb
2006
20 Feb
'06
7:43 p.m.
On Mon, Feb 20, 2006 at 11:41:43PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
Quite true.
They have paid
for a license to use it, and for nothing else.
Well, then they might have some expectation to be able to use it, no?
Without the ability to adapt the software to different devices or
applications, or fix errors (or pay someone to do that), the software
is crippled in its usefulness.
When buying electronic appliances, at one time you could rely on the
schematics being in the inside. That meant you could make full use of
the appliance, adapt it to different problems (using a radio as a
guitar amplifier), repair it and keep it in working order, and you
could take it to service men of your choice to have it adapted or
fixed.
That's basically what workmanship is about: offering the best to the
customer to make use of. Just 20 years ago, it was customary to provide
computer purchasers or
service people with schematics, BIOS listings and similar stuff
(partly on request and for payment). Now it is trade secret this,
closed source that, not for your eyes this.
All true, and I feel bad about this evolution myself, but please read
what I wrote. You did not _pay_ for source code, portability to other
system, schematics, or whatever, and that was very clear from the start,
so don't claim you did. And if it's a bad deal, just don't buy it.
--
FA