[CoLoCo] Can anyone help refute this?

[Tibor Hetei]

> On Nov 21, 2007, at 10:43 PM, "Ringo Kamens" <2600denver at gmail.com>
>
> wrote:
> > Saying that companies selling support require or induce the sales of
> > computers that are designed to break is like saying that doctors need
> > to make people sick to stay in the business. People will get sick,
> > computers will break, and there need to be somebody there when it does
> > happen. While it's true that a flu epidemic or a new virus might boost
> > their income, they don't need catastrophic events to occur to make
> > money.

Ringo. I agree. To further your point:

To the user of a piece of software the most economic value comes from being 
able to utilize a constantly updated well running software (feature set) that 
is kept up to date and customized to fit their needs especially as their 
needs change over time.

To the creator of the software the most economic value comes from providing 
the necessary customizations (improvements) to users rather than just 
bugfixes. That is not to say that bugfixes are not important but rather to 
say that bugfixes are NOT the "main feature" of the software that users want.

I think the real value lies in a piece of software and hence its creators 
becoming part of a commonly used infrastructure. That is what apache and 
mysql is to the internet. That is what open source software and the open 
source development model is to the common good of humanity is.

Tibor