[kwlug disc.] "people don't respect what they don't pay for"

[Randy Metcalfe]

On 20/09/2007, Robert P. J. Day <rpjday at mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>   the above is something a good friend of mine said to me recently
> when we were discussing open source versus proprietary.  we weren't
> having a deep, philosophical discussion, i had just made a throwaway
> statement that i like the idea of working with open source and
> freely-available software as opposed to the opposite, which is when
> that statement came out.
>
>   to be fair, this friend works for a large software concern whose
> entire business model is founded on (no surprise) selling
> closed-source software, so what else would you expect to hear?  it's
> possible he really didn't mean it, he was just parroting the defensive
> and territorial party line.
>
>   but what if he *did* mean it?  how do you respond to something like
> that?  and, yes, we all know the standard responses we've heard for
> years, so let's not go *there*.
>
>   i'm more curious as to what you'd say if this was a good friend of
> yours who, out of the blue, made that rather astonishing claim.  it
> wouldn't do any good to speak of the value of linux, or apache, or
> openoffice, if said person had never used any of them, and was
> perfectly happy in a microsoft-centric environment.  if that's the
> case, i'm not sure *what* kind of response you could make.
>
>   i'm just curious -- what have others done in this situation?  and
> keep in mind, this is a friend that you want to *keep* as a friend,
> but whose entire livelihood exists because of a closed-source
> software business model.  *is* there a counter-argument?
>

I think there are two routes to counter-argument, while seeking to
maintain your friendship (but it may be that these just are the
standard responses you refer to).

The first is to point out that your friend can definitely pay for his
free and open source software in the form of a robust support
contract, as for example with RHEL. In this example, there is
essentially no difference on the budget line between the software
being FOSS or proprietary.

The second is a hypothetical that I find worth posing. Ask your friend
what software he/she would choose, proprietary or FOSS, if faced with
a choice between two functionally equivalent options. Of course this
is a hypothetical because we rarely encounter these kind of Buridan's
ass type cases. I think that in such a case I have a reason to choose
the FOSS option. But if your friend thinks that in such a case he/she
has a reason to choose the proprietary option, and that this reason is
simply because it costs money, then I think it best to drop the
discussion and talk about the Blue Jays instead. Or find a new friend.

Cheers,

Randy

-- 
Randy Metcalfe