Re: [LAU] arch users? - Linux-audio-user

3 Dec 2009

On Thursday 03 December 2009 09:06:35 you wrote:
...
  On Thu, 2009-12-03 at 08:09 -0500, drew Roberts
wrote:
  On Thursday 03 December 2009 05:04:26 Ng Oon-Ee
wrote:
   Oh, I was
thinking Golden Arch Linux would be the paid-support
 version of Arch Linux. 
 Quite difficult to have a 'paid-support' version of a distro that's not
 owned/managed by a company =). 
 Yup, but not too difficult to have paid support for a distro that's not
 owned/managed by a company.Right?

 all the best,

 drew 
 I guess. Doubt it'd be a good economic prospect in any case, considering
 the user base either:-
 a) doesn't need your help
 b) needs your help but won't pay for it cos "OMGZZ THIS ISN'T WINDOWS
 WHY SHOULD I PAY"

 Disclaimer: I use Arch myself, and I know very very few users who fall
 into b). Few isn't none, however =) 
Well, Free Software is not going to make it some places unless this problem is 
solved.

You need to have paid support in both one off and contractual options for the 
distro and apps available for a Free distro and app system.

A vendor lock in play on the distro or app front is not going to really cut 
it. Why would someone seeking to get away from the vendor lock in game they 
are in now move to another vendor lock in game with a twist. By the same 
token, they will not move to a Free game if they cannot assure themselves of 
support "on-demand" as they know they need it. And hiring bodies to provide 
the paid support for the Free game is not cost effective in all situations.

all the best,

drew