rec.autos.simulators

GPL-Patch, just to put this clear (quite angry)

Wolfgang Prei

GPL-Patch, just to put this clear (quite angry)

by Wolfgang Prei » Thu, 15 Jul 1999 04:00:00

May I add my 2 cents (again)?

I agree that constructive criticism is needed. I also agree that
people who criticize aspects of GPL and the patch should not be called
whiners (although some of them do indeed sound like whiners).

Well, this really depends. As I said in a previous post, Papyrus are
under no obligation to patch their products. There is no law, either
in the US, Germany, or elsewhere, that forces a software producer to
patch programs. (Maybe there is such a law - I'm no lawyer - but I
would be greatly surprised.)

Therefore, Papyrus have to decide whether or not to make a patch.
Ultimately, they have to base the decision on money. Will they make
more money by providing the patch (through increased sales of GPL or
some future products) than by not providing a patch (by saving
expenses in manpower)?

Now, if it is really true that Randy Cassidy made the patch in his
spare time, then *nagging* will have, if any, an adverse effect: the
company Papyrus had already decided that making a patch was not
economically viable. The individual Randy Cassidy decided to make a
patch anyway. A company might interpret nagging as a demand by the
customer which needs to be heeded. An individual might interpret
nagging as a sign that he should spend more time with friends and
family in the future, instead of making patches for ungrateful
strangers. ;)

--
Wolfgang Preiss   \ E-mail copies of replies to this posting are welcome.


EXCHANGE:HAL02:HQ

GPL-Patch, just to put this clear (quite angry)

by EXCHANGE:HAL02:HQ » Sat, 17 Jul 1999 04:00:00


> BTW: the blonde girl is a nice idea, should be picked up by the
> programers

What? The idea or the blonde? :-)

        Paul

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

   Nortel, London Road, Harlow, Essex. CM17 9NA

Chuck Kandle

GPL-Patch, just to put this clear (quite angry)

by Chuck Kandle » Wed, 21 Jul 1999 04:00:00


> Now, if you paid $20,000 for a license to run a GPL dedicated server, which
> is closer to the figure of the cost of a lot of cars, then yes you should be
> able to expect the company to fix the software.  But not a $50 piece of
> software.......

Baloney.  Like my momma used to say, "Rip 10 million people off for .01 and you
have $100,000."  Lets see, at $50 a pop that works out to..............

Point being, although I *love* GPL, the sentiment in general is absolutely
correct.  To lay down & take it you-know-where with products that bear no
resemblance to their hype or sometimes their own screenshots on the box is
ridiculous. (Remember CPR & ABC Indy Racing, for example?)  And most places I
know of won't take back opened software.  Exchange it at best.  And if there's
no other faulty software you're interested in?  You have no recourse, my
friend.  They *already* have your money.  In my case, I'm not sure this really
applies to GPL, but others may very well feel that way.  So be it.

--
Chuck Kandler  #70
K&S Racing
http://www.fortunecity.com/silverstone/thepits/195
The box said "Windows 95 or better", so I installed LINUX!

J

GPL-Patch, just to put this clear (quite angry)

by J » Thu, 22 Jul 1999 04:00:00

Let the progammers pick up the idea and leave the girl to me :-)))

Jens

On Fri, 16 Jul 1999 12:54:41 +0100, "Venkatesh, Paul



>> BTW: the blonde girl is a nice idea, should be picked up by the
>> programers

>What? The idea or the blonde? :-)

>    Paul

---------------------------------------------

Remove "NOSPAM" before using my email-address

rec.autos.simulators is a usenet newsgroup formed in December, 1993. As this group was always unmoderated there may be some spam or off topic articles included. Some links do point back to racesimcentral.net as we could not validate the original address. Please report any pages that you believe warrant deletion from this archive (include the link in your email). RaceSimCentral.net is in no way responsible and does not endorse any of the content herein.