Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 21st Jul 2012 23:06 UTC
Permalink for comment 527677
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 14:44 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 23:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:01 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:30 UTC, submitted by JRepin
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 22:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:45 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2012-04-24
Complaints about a loss of faith in a "philosophy" that amounted to expecting that buying a product meant you had an ethical claim on the vendor is nonsense.
All talk of "supporting" a product, in the closed and open worlds, is silly and naive.
Open source does not guarantee any product will survive. The arena is littered with products that died when their devlopers lost interest. Sure, other developers can pick them up or fork them, but they lose interest, as well.
Besides, a closed product like Sparrow can be emulated, rather than forked. Sparrow showed there is a market for a simple, cheap email client for OS X. Maybe someone else will try to exploit that.
In any case, users are at the mercy of developers, open and closed. If they don't want to code it, there's nothing we can do about it.