Which brings us to the point of basically saying that some software
seems to better off if it is proprietary.
Right?
On 7/25/10, Paul Davis <paul(a)linuxaudiosystems.com> wrote:
On Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 8:00 AM, David Baron
<d_baron(a)012.net.il> wrote:
Going gpl does not preclude selling finish
products.
No, it doesn't. But it does create strong downward price pressure. If
there a market for product at price P, then there is a market for it a
price (P-1). Releasing under the GPL allows anyone who buys it at P
can resell at P-1. But if there is a market for it at P-1, then there
is a market for it at price P-2. the GPL allows anyone who buys it at
P-1 (or P) to resell at P-2. and so on, all the way down to P-P = 0.
This has less impact for companies like RedHat, where there is a
strong support market. It also has less impact on companies making s/w
that is a pain in the neck to install, even in pre-compiled form (e.g.
embedded systems) or that has very specific h/w requirements.
But audio plugins don't fit either category. The support needs are
pretty minimal, and the whole point of them is to be (a) easy to
install (b) avoiding any special h/w (this is why h/w dongles make
their use such a pain for some people). They have the additional
problem of *appearing* to be small and presumably simple little chunks
of code, which devalues them in the eyes of a pretty large section of
the user base. Very specialized plugins can have more apparent value,
and users who understand the complexities of creating a really good
digital (say) filter might also value the work.
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user