Ignorance regarding money issues(Was: Why I can't use Lisp.)
thelifter
free compilers for Lisp.
Erik Naggum wrote:
It is because you are unable to make money on what you do, and that
again is
because have nothing to offer anyone. This may be by nature of by
choice,
Usually I would just ignore comments like these because I have more to
do with my time. But after thinking about it for a while I came to
realize that the ignorance expressed by this guy is probably
widespread and most people don't realize it, so an explanation may be
helpful and hopefully you can increase your knowledge.
What most people who live in the richer countries(mostly US, Canada
and Europe) don't realize is that the majority of this worlds
population live in much poorer conditions.
So maybe the persons suggesting me to buy Corman Lisp for 200$ should
be informed that 200$ is actually 50% of my monthly salary. In other
words 200$ is a lot more for someone who earns 400$ a month than for
someone who earns 4000$ a month.
I think the problem goes deeper than that. I wonder if software
vendors actually realize that income in poor countries is much lower
than in rich countries(this also applies to company income). So why
not adjust the pricing accordingly? IMHO it simply makes no sense to
charge the same price for a product all over the world. This is
especially true for software where the cost of reproducing it is
almost zero(consider download).
Some companies could probably increase their income this way, because
a cheaper price may also attract more customers.
A higher price will cause the software to be pirated. In the country I
live you can buy any software CD from professional pirates for just 2
US$.
And to be honest I don't blame the guys copying software for their
private use. Especially if you are not using the software
professionaly but only to educate yourself. In a sense I think its
like a hungry person stealing food. You can't blame someone for
stealing food if he has no money to buy it.
I think you can't blame a person to copy software for his education if
he can't afford to pay for it. You shouldn't deny someone access to
education.
Best regards...
Edi Weitz
> What most people who live in the richer countries(mostly US, Canada
> and Europe) don't realize is that the majority of this worlds
> population live in much poorer conditions.
That's funny. I always thought that gmx.net email addresses were
mostly used by people living in Germany. Also, a quick Google search
shows postings from thel...@gmx.net in German newsgroups like
de.rec.garten. So, do we have to conclude that Germany is one of those
poor countries where the majority of the world population lives?
Edi (from Hamburg, Germany)
Tim Bradshaw
> I think the problem goes deeper than that. I wonder if software
> vendors actually realize that income in poor countries is much lower
> than in rich countries(this also applies to company income). So why
> not adjust the pricing accordingly? IMHO it simply makes no sense to
> charge the same price for a product all over the world. This is
> especially true for software where the cost of reproducing it is
> almost zero(consider download).
> Some companies could probably increase their income this way, because
> a cheaper price may also attract more customers.
So, say I'm a large US-based multinational planning to buy some
product. I have a subsidiary in, say, Brazil, where the vendor sells
the product cheaply. Do I buy the product in the US, or do I buy it
in Brazil? How does the vendor deal with this?
By a fascinating coincidence, on the news today I heard that the
regionalisation scheme for DVDs is in the process of collapse because
it's proved unenforceable.
--tim
Thien-Thi Nguyen
> So, do we have to conclude that Germany is one of those
> poor countries where the majority of the world population lives?
any culture that subverts education is poor.
thi
Erik Naggum
| What most people who live in the richer countries(mostly US, Canada and
| Europe) don't realize is that the majority of this worlds population live in
| much poorer conditions.
Who cares? If they have something to offer me, I will gladly pay them on
/my/ scale. That is, if you, instead of being a destitute idiot, could do
some work for me that others would only do for USD 10,000, but at a
massively lower cost for yourself, you could charge USD 9,990 for it and
amass USD 9,000 in profits instead of the USD 2,000 that others would make.
That would probably afford you 1,000 times more real value in your povertry-
stricken economy than those others would get out of it, so your opportunity
to make a really huge profit is much, much greater with the same investment.
So you just shot down your own stupid argument with an elephant rifle.
| IMHO it simply makes no sense to charge the same price for a product all
| over the world.
Many American companies charge a lot more of their European customers.
Perhaps you are unaware of this and should be accused of willfull ignorance?
| This is especially true for software where the cost of reproducing it is
| almost zero(consider download).
You are not paying for the bits, you are paying for what it cost to make
them and maintain them, amortized over the total number of copies made.
| Some companies could probably increase their income this way, because a
| cheaper price may also attract more customers.
Ah, a brilliant financial genius whose brilliance far exceeds that of every
single investor in the entire Western Hemisphere! How come they don't do
this? Think about it! No wonder you are still poor.
| A higher price will cause the software to be pirated. In the country I live
| you can buy any software CD from professional pirates for just 2 US$.
Well, brilliant. That keeps /you/ in poverty, too.
Your chosen nick is apt. The lifter is indeed a thief.
--
Erik Naggum, Oslo, Norway
Act from reason, and failure makes you rethink and study harder.
Act from faith, and failure makes you blame someone and push harder.
Charlton Wilbur
I agree with this. However, "I needed to learn <commercial package>"
is insufficient justification for copyright violation. Given the easy
availability of open source and free software, there's no reason to
copy Microsoft Word when you can use OpenOffice or KOffice for free.
In the case of complex software that doesn't have a good free
equivalent available (the original poster asked about LISP compilers;
I can think of several other domains for which there are good
proprietary solutions and no good free solutions), then the provider
of that software stands to profit greatly from making a limited
version of the software available for free.
Any culture that subverts education is poor. However, any culture
that says one thing (a country is a signatory to the Berne
convention on copyrights) and does another (rampant copyright
violation) is likewise poor.
Charlton
JB
> * thelifter wrote:
>
>> I think the problem goes deeper than that. I wonder if
>> software vendors actually realize that income in poor
>> countries is much lower than in rich countries(this also
>> applies to company income). So why not adjust the pricing
>> accordingly? IMHO it simply makes no sense to charge the
>> same price for a product all over the world. This is
>> especially true for software where the cost of
>> reproducing it is almost zero(consider download). Some
>> companies could probably increase their income this way,
>> because a cheaper price may also attract more customers.
>
> So, say I'm a large US-based multinational planning to buy
> some
> product. I have a subsidiary in, say, Brazil, where the
> vendor sells
> the product cheaply. Do I buy the product in the US, or
> do I buy it
> in Brazil? How does the vendor deal with this?
The cost of a product depends on many factors, some of which
vary from country to country, like local taxes, exchange
rates and the cost of distribution. It is quite usual that
you can buy the very same product at different prices in
different countries and this is reckognized as a serious
problem for the vendors which depend upon selling their
products in foreign markets.
By the way, I have just seen that the computer algebra
system Magma is cheaper for customers from a "developing
country", as they put it.
--
JB
-----------== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----= Over 100,000 Newsgroups - Unlimited Fast Downloads - 19 Servers =-----
AFS97209
> A while ago I posted a message complaining about the absence of good
Well, I live in Oregon and can throw a baseball from where I live and
hit some Intel labs, but I didn't pay a dime for anything I'm using to
learn Common Lisp with. I got Mandrake 8.2 free....
http://www.mandrakelinux.com/en/
My editor, xemacs came with Mandrake. I had to get ilisp to set xemacs
up, which is available here...
http://sourceforge.net/projects/ilisp/
I had to download the CMUCL Common Lisp compiler...
Rpm files for cmucl can be found here...
The cmucl compiler is an outstanding CL compiler. Generates very fast
code. In fact, it might be the best ommon lisp compiler out there.
So I don't think the lisp community can do much more than it has to
create good free tools to program in common lisp. If the basis of your
complaint is that nobody is handing you a common lisp version of MS
Visual Studio for free, well, you're expecting way too much from the
world. I'll agree that the programming community owes the people of
the world good stable up-to-date tools to program with. It does not
owe the world bleeding edge tools with all the bells and whistles for
free.
Craig Brozefsky
> | Some companies could probably increase their income this way, because a
> | cheaper price may also attract more customers.
>
> Ah, a brilliant financial genius whose brilliance far exceeds that of every
> single investor in the entire Western Hemisphere! How come they don't do
> this? Think about it! No wonder you are still poor.
Many large companies do actually. I do not know if Franz or other
commercial CL vendors do. This was also part of the motivation for
DVD region encoding.
Also my company has adjusted price downwards for our proprietary
software when selling into countries whose currency is very weak
against the U.S. Dollar.
--
Sincerely,
Craig Brozefsky <cr...@red-bean.com>
Free Scheme/Lisp Software http://www.red-bean.com/~craig
Aleksandr Skobelev
Irritated Demagogy Syndrome.
Fernando Rodríguez
He seems to be posting from Uruguay.
-----------------------
Fernando Rodriguez
Marco Antoniotti
Charlton Wilbur <cwi...@mithril.chromatico.net> writes:
> Thien-Thi Nguyen <t...@glug.org> writes:
>
> > Edi Weitz <e...@agharta.de> writes:
> >
> > > So, do we have to conclude that Germany is one of those
> > > poor countries where the majority of the world population lives?
> >
> > any culture that subverts education is poor.
>
> I agree with this. However, "I needed to learn <commercial package>"
> is insufficient justification for copyright violation. Given the easy
> availability of open source and free software, there's no reason to
> copy Microsoft Word when you can use OpenOffice or KOffice for free.
>
...
>
> Any culture that subverts education is poor. However, any culture
> that says one thing (a country is a signatory to the Berne
> convention on copyrights) and does another (rampant copyright
> violation) is likewise poor.
On the other end... countries who put "copyright violations", and
"intellectual property rights", "free trade" in front of "human,
environmental, health, education, justice, peace and workers' rights"
are poor as well.
Cheers
PS. For the record. I was born and raised 40Km from Milan, Italy
(arguably one of the richests places on earth, despite the continuous
lamentations of some of its residents, some of whom are now literally
"running the show" in Italy), and live in New York.
--
Marco Antoniotti ========================================================
NYU Courant Bioinformatics Group tel. +1 - 212 - 998 3488
715 Broadway 10th Floor fax +1 - 212 - 995 4122
New York, NY 10003, USA http://bioinformatics.cat.nyu.edu
"Hello New York! We'll do what we can!"
Bill Murray in `Ghostbusters'.
Barry Margolin
thelifter <thel...@gmx.net> wrote:
>So maybe the persons suggesting me to buy Corman Lisp for 200$ should
>be informed that 200$ is actually 50% of my monthly salary. In other
>words 200$ is a lot more for someone who earns 400$ a month than for
>someone who earns 4000$ a month.
>
>I think the problem goes deeper than that. I wonder if software
>vendors actually realize that income in poor countries is much lower
>than in rich countries(this also applies to company income). So why
>not adjust the pricing accordingly? IMHO it simply makes no sense to
>charge the same price for a product all over the world. This is
>especially true for software where the cost of reproducing it is
>almost zero(consider download).
>Some companies could probably increase their income this way, because
>a cheaper price may also attract more customers.
There's more to the cost of publishing software than just reproduction.
There's also things like technical support. A professional-level software
development environment is not like a computer game, where all they care
about is volume. In the case of software like this, if they have more
customers, they need to hire more employees, and those costs need to be
reflected in the price.
Honestly, I doubt that most software vendors really give a damn about
losing a few sales in the third world.
--
Barry Margolin, bar...@genuity.net
Genuity, Woburn, MA
*** DON'T SEND TECHNICAL QUESTIONS DIRECTLY TO ME, post them to newsgroups.
Please DON'T copy followups to me -- I'll assume it wasn't posted to the group.
Paolo Amoroso
> I think you can't blame a person to copy software for his education if
> he can't afford to pay for it. You shouldn't deny someone access to
> education.
This might be understandable if there weren't any alternatives. But a
number of good Common Lisp implementations are available gratis, including
excellent trial versions of expensive commercial products.
There is so much free-speech/gratis software available, even in the Lisp
world, that your claims are unbelievable. If you mentions Corman Lisp, it
looks like you are using Windows. If so, why don't you use Linux or one of
the xBSD variants? Didn't you pay for your Windows?
And if you use Windows, you miss the opportunity of experimenting with CMU
CL, whose compiler optimizations earned it the respect of the Lisp
community. Now who is denying you access to this valuable educational
experience?
You haven't made it clear yet why you _absolutely_ need the additional
features of commercially licensed products (i.e. mostly the ability to
nicely pack application for delivery to users) for your _education_: what
features do you need to _learn_ Common Lisp? _Exactly_ what is stopping you
from getting a first class education with gratis Lisp tools?
For the record, it is _trivial_ to pack applications developed with CLISP
and CMU CL for delivery to users. And if I remember correctly, the gratis
trial edition of Corman Lisp also nicely allows this.
Paolo
--
EncyCMUCLopedia * Extensive collection of CMU Common Lisp documentation
http://www.paoloamoroso.it/ency/README
Bulent Murtezaoglu
[...]
PA> There is so much free-speech/gratis software available, even
PA> in the Lisp world, that your claims are unbelievable. If you
PA> mentions Corman Lisp, it looks like you are using Windows. If
PA> so, why don't you use Linux or one of the xBSD variants?
PA> Didn't you pay for your Windows?
This seems to be a problem. People do not seem inclined to go the
xBSD or Linux route if they have always been on MS OSs. We couln't
convince Kenny (of Clinisys, I don't remember the last name sorry) to
bring up Linux even though he seemed somewhat motivated at first.
There are multiple easy ways to do things (VMware, X to a cheap box, a
dedicated box) without dual booting but all of those require some
background to understand/appreciate. Whenever this comes up, I toy
with the idea of doing a write-up on various methods with screen shots
and all that, but I don't know [even if it were done properly] how
effective it would be. One could roll out a simple Debian CD that
would give people a listener + emacs without burdening them with
sysadmin duties and maybe that would help.
Maybe a large enough proportion of these people are trolls though and
one ought not expend effort for them. I'd love to hear a first hand
success story of someone helping a Windows person use CMUCL under
*nix. I obviously was never able to do this. It has been about 5-6
years since I helped anyone switch to even Emacs on any platform!
PA> And if you use Windows, you miss the opportunity of
PA> experimenting with CMU CL, whose compiler optimizations earned
PA> it the respect of the Lisp community. Now who is denying you
PA> access to this valuable educational experience? [...]
Yes, I'll second that. If performance is important, CMUCL would help
not only with producing speedy code but also by pointing out what is
slow and why. Those compiler notes are extremely useful in acquiring
a background in what makes Lisp slow/fast.
cheers,
BM
Barry Margolin
Bulent Murtezaoglu <b...@acm.org> wrote:
>>>>>> "PA" == Paolo Amoroso <amo...@mclink.it> writes:
>[...]
> PA> There is so much free-speech/gratis software available, even
> PA> in the Lisp world, that your claims are unbelievable. If you
> PA> mentions Corman Lisp, it looks like you are using Windows. If
> PA> so, why don't you use Linux or one of the xBSD variants?
> PA> Didn't you pay for your Windows?
>
>This seems to be a problem. People do not seem inclined to go the
>xBSD or Linux route if they have always been on MS OSs.
As the saying goes, beggars can't be choosers. And in this case, "beggars"
isn't even a metaphor.
ilias
> In article <87n0rhj...@cinifa.internal>,
> Bulent Murtezaoglu <b...@acm.org> wrote:
>
>>This seems to be a problem. People do not seem inclined to go the
>>xBSD or Linux route if they have always been on MS OSs.
>
>
> As the saying goes, beggars can't be choosers. And in this case, "beggars"
> isn't even a metaphor.
>
could you please clarify this?
is it you intention to say:
'thelifter' (the person who started the thread) is a beggar, so he can't
choose?
Will Deakin
> Barry Margolin wrote:
>> Bulent Murtezaoglu <b...@acm.org> wrote:
> ...
>>> This seems to be a problem. People do not seem inclined to go the
>>> xBSD or Linux route if they have always been on MS OSs.
>> As the saying goes, beggars can't be choosers. And in this case,
>> "beggars" isn't even a metaphor.
> could you please clarify this?
A Zen teacher called Hogen lived alone in a small temple
in the country. One day four monks appeared and asked
if they might make a fire in his yard.
Whilst building the fire, Hogen heard them arguing about
objectivity and subjectivity and asked: "Here is a big stone.
Is it inside or outside your mind?"
One of the monks replied: "I would say that the stone is
inside my mind."
"Your head must feel very heavy if you are carrying around
a stone like."
:)w
ilias
please don't make things more complicated.
i requested clarification from the poster to avoid a misunderstanding.
It was in form of a (hopefully) clear question. the question was:
> is it you intention to say:
>
> 'thelifter' (the person who started the thread) is a beggar, so he can't choose?
the poster can answer this question.
And maybe someone who knows him well enought.
P.S.: i'm courious to know, which essence you extract out of the story
of the zen teacher. And of how this relates to the (at least form me)
unclear statement.
Will Deakin
> please don't make things more complicated.
that makes life worth living.
> i requested clarification from the poster to avoid a misunderstanding.
> It was in form of a (hopefully) clear question. the question was:
>
>> is it you intention to say:
>>
>> 'thelifter' (the person who started the thread) is a beggar, so he
>> can't choose?
I can not and do not speak for Barry Margolin but I find the meaning
of the statement fairly unambigous -- in as much as any statement can
be. Then again (I think) I know the meaning of the saying "beggars
can't be choosers". I simply don't think it means that thelifter is a
beggar. At least not in an objective kind of way.
> P.S.: i'm courious to know, which essence you extract out of the story
> of the zen teacher.
It is a tale that relates to the objective and subjective nature of
reality.
> And of how this relates to the (at least form me) unclear statement.
Hmmm. We may need to reflect on this a while.
:)w
Christopher Browne
> ilias wrote:
>> please don't make things more complicated.
> Why? It is the joy and challenge of dealing and simplifying complexity
> that makes life worth living.
>
>> i requested clarification from the poster to avoid a misunderstanding.
>> It was in form of a (hopefully) clear question. the question was:
>>
>>> is it you intention to say:
>>>
>>> 'thelifter' (the person who started the thread) is a beggar, so he
>>> can't choose?
> I can not and do not speak for Barry Margolin but I find the meaning
> of the statement fairly unambigous -- in as much as any statement can
> be. Then again (I think) I know the meaning of the saying "beggars
> can't be choosers". I simply don't think it means that thelifter is a
> beggar. At least not in an objective kind of way.
He's effectively shaking a cup, and crying "Lisp, for the poor! Lisp
for the poor!" in the hopes that someone will put a Lisp
implementation into his "cup."
That sure _looks_ like a beggar...
>> P.S.: i'm courious to know, which essence you extract out of the
>> story of the zen teacher.
> It is a tale that relates to the objective and subjective nature of
> reality.
>
>> And of how this relates to the (at least form me) unclear statement.
> Hmmm. We may need to reflect on this a while.
A famous Lisp Hacker noticed an Undergraduate sitting in front of a
Xerox 1108, trying to edit a complex Klone network via a browser.
Wanting to help, the Hacker clicked one of the nodes in the network
with the mouse, and asked "what do you see?" Very earnestly, the
Undergraduate replied "I see a cursor." The Hacker then quickly
pressed the boot toggle at the back of the keyboard, while
simultaneously hitting the Undergraduate over the head with a thick
Interlisp Manual. The Undergraduate was then Enlightened.
I wonder if anyone else needs to be struck over the head with a thick
Interlisp Manual, perhaps several times...
--
(concatenate 'string "cbbrowne" "@acm.org")
http://cbbrowne.com/info/
Any programmer who fails to comply with the standard naming,
formatting, or commenting conventions should be shot. If it so
happens that it is inconvenient to shoot him, then he is to be
politely requested to recode his program in adherence to the above
standard. -- Michael Spier, Digital Equipment Corporation
Will Deakin
> That sure _looks_ like a beggar...
use of the saying "beggars can't be choosers"[1]. Hey ho.
> I wonder if anyone else needs to be struck over the head with a thick
> Interlisp Manual, perhaps several times...
I'm up for a bit if theres any going.
:)w
[1] There are lots phrases like this: Hobson's choice, beggar belief,
in the land of the blind the one eyed man is king, or even beggar me
;) None of which imply that the person to whom the phrase is directed
at is *actually* the thing that the phrase talks about.
ilias
> ilias wrote:
>
>> please don't make things more complicated.
>
> Why? It is the joy and challenge of dealing and simplifying complexity
> that makes life worth living.
limited by:
- not only.
- not always.
- not for everyone.
i agree fully, limited by 'not always' and 'not only'.
>> i requested clarification from the poster to avoid a misunderstanding.
>> It was in form of a (hopefully) clear question. the question was:
>>
>>> is it you intention to say:
>>>
>>> 'thelifter' (the person who started the thread) is a beggar, so he
>>> can't choose?
>>
> I can not and do not speak for Barry Margolin but I find the meaning of
> the statement fairly unambigous -- in as much as any statement can be.
ok.
*you* find it.
> Then again (I think) I know the meaning of the saying "beggars can't be
> choosers". I simply don't think it means that thelifter is a beggar. At
> least not in an objective kind of way.
*you* think.
*you* (think) *you* know the meaning of the saying ...
*you* simply don't think it means...
>> P.S.: i'm courious to know, which essence you extract out of the story
>> of the zen teacher.
>
> It is a tale that relates to the objective and subjective nature of
> reality.
aha.
>> And of how this relates to the (at least form me) unclear statement.
>
> Hmmm. We may need to reflect on this a while.
i try to simplify. to make minimalistic questions. this is neccessary as
i don't know the people here and as i don't have the best grammatics and
vocabulary in english.
so feeding me with zen-stories to find solutions is not very friendly.
i'm basicly here, to analyze LISP (and so: the folks around LISP)
i was not sure, if the phrase was an 'attack'.
maybe some others are not sure, too.
maybe the topic-poster (thelifter) understands it wrong, too.
that was the main reason why i ask the poster B.M. to clarify.
Will Deakin
>> Why? It is the joy and challenge of dealing and simplifying complexity
>> that makes life worth living.
No. Not limited by anything.
>> Then again (I think) I know the meaning of the saying "beggars can't
>> be choosers". I simply don't think it means that thelifter is a
>> beggar. At least not in an objective kind of way.
>
> *you* think.
>
> *you* (think) *you* know the meaning of the saying ...
>
> *you* simply don't think it means...
Yes, I think, I think I know the meaning and don't think it means.
Would you prefer me to not think or to not know. Or to know and not think?
> so feeding me with zen-stories to find solutions is not very friendly.
Maybe not. There are much more directly ways of being unfriendly, however.
I would prefer to characterise it as a leg pull.
> i'm basicly here, to analyze LISP (and so: the folks around LISP)
This sounds like some form of therapy ;)
> i was not sure, if the phrase was an 'attack'.
What do you mean by attack?
> maybe some others are not sure, too.
Let them speak for themselves.
:)w
"Whereof one does not know, thereof one should remain silent." -- L.
Wittgenstein
Dorai Sitaram
Will Deakin <aniso...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Christopher Browne wrote:
>> That sure _looks_ like a beggar...
>That may be true. But that isn't exactly how I read Barry Margolin's
>use of the saying "beggars can't be choosers"[1]. Hey ho.
Barry was pretty adamantly explicit that "beggar" in
this context was not metaphorical. Given that, why are
you going to this bizzare effort involving Zen
koans and discussions of unrelated English idioms to
attempt to salvage something that was clearly not
Barry's intent?
il...@lazaridis.de
> ilias wrote:
>
>>> Why? It is the joy and challenge of dealing and simplifying
>>> complexity that makes life worth living.
>>
> > ...i agree fully, limited by 'not always' and 'not only'.
> No. Not limited by anything.
for *you*.
for *me*:
*yes*.
i agree...
limited by...
sorry.
>>> Then again (I think) I know the meaning of the saying "beggars can't
>>> be choosers". I simply don't think it means that thelifter is a
>>> beggar. At least not in an objective kind of way.
>>
>> *you* think.
>>
>> *you* (think) *you* know the meaning of the saying ...
>>
>> *you* simply don't think it means...
>
> Yes, I think, I think I know the meaning and don't think it means. Would
> you prefer me to not think or to not know. Or to know and not think?
think. indeep. context. calm.
>> so feeding me with zen-stories to find solutions is not very friendly.
>
> Maybe not. There are much more directly ways of being unfriendly,
however.
> I would prefer to characterise it as a leg pull.
still unfriendly.
>> i'm basicly here, to analyze LISP (and so: the folks around LISP)
>
> This sounds like some form of therapy ;)
no. it is a form of 'joy and challenge in dealing and simplifying
complexity'
>> i was not sure, if the phrase was an 'attack'.
>
> What do you mean by attack?
an verbal attack. being offensive. beiing unfriendly.
>> maybe some others are not sure, too.
>
> Let them speak for themselves.
as you let B.M. speak for hisself?
howerver, i speak for myself.
typical for c.l.l., you cut my post:
this you forget:
>> maybe the topic-poster (thelifter) understands it wrong, too.
>> that was the main reason why i ask the poster B.M. to clarify.
i know.
i should let him speak for himself, e?
i tend to protect the weak, if i see savages around them.
> :)w
>
> "Whereof one does not know, thereof one should remain silent." -- L.
> Wittgenstein
control your knowledge.
ilias
> A while ago I posted a message complaining about the absence of good
> free compilers for Lisp.
>
> Erik Naggum wrote:
> It is because you are unable to make money on what you do, and that
> again is
> because have nothing to offer anyone. This may be by nature of by
> choice,
>
> Usually I would just ignore comments like these because I have more to
> do with my time. But after thinking about it for a while I came to
> realize that the ignorance expressed by this guy is probably
> widespread and most people don't realize it, so an explanation may be
> helpful and hopefully you can increase your knowledge.
the only thing that connects me with the people here in c.l.l. is the
fact that we belong to the same species.
i feel shame for what i hear from some posters in this newsgroups.
shame, for what is called human.
Barry Margolin
Yes. If you're poor, you don't have the option of choosing things that are
more expensive than you can afford. If you need something, you have to
take the one that's within your price range, even if it's not the color
that you prefer. You make do with what you can afford. You eat chicken,
even you like steak better.
So if you can't afford a Windows CL, but there's a Linux CL that you can
afford, you either switch to Linux or do without. Vendors are under no
obligation to lower their prices just so poor customers can afford their
products (except in some regulated industries -- most utilities in the US
are required to provide "lifeline" services, so that poor customers can get
these necessities, but Common Lisp is not yet considered a necessity).
ilias
message recovered "out of my brain".
this explains possibel 2 differetn versions of this post.
Will Deakin wrote:
> ilias wrote:
>
>>> Why? It is the joy and challenge of dealing and simplifying
>>> complexity that makes life worth living.
>>
> > ...i agree fully, limited by 'not always' and 'not only'.
> No. Not limited by anything.
for *you*
for me
i agree.
limited by...
sorry.
>
>>> Then again (I think) I know the meaning of the saying "beggars can't
>>> be choosers". I simply don't think it means that thelifter is a
>>> beggar. At least not in an objective kind of way.
>>
>>
>> *you* think.
>>
>> *you* (think) *you* know the meaning of the saying ...
>>
>> *you* simply don't think it means...
>
> Yes, I think, I think I know the meaning and don't think it means. Would
> you prefer me to not think or to not know. Or to know and not think?
think. context. calm.
>> so feeding me with zen-stories to find solutions is not very friendly.
>
> Maybe not. There are much more directly ways of being unfriendly, however.
> I would prefer to characterise it as a leg pull.
still unfriendly.
>> i'm basicly here, to analyze LISP (and so: the folks around LISP)
>
> This sounds like some form of therapy ;)
no, some form of joy and challenge of dealing and simplifying
complexity.
>> i was not sure, if the phrase was an 'attack'.
>
> What do you mean by attack?
being offensive. beeing unfriendly.
>> maybe some others are not sure, too.
>
> Let them speak for themselves.
like you let B.M. answer for himself?
i speak for myself.
but you forgot something of my post:
>> maybe the topic-poster (thelifter) understands it wrong, too.
>> that was the main reason why i ask the poster B.M. to clarify.
one, attacked by may savages.
and i speak. when the day comes, where i don't speak in such situations,
hopefully someone spits into my face.
>
> :)w
>
> "Whereof one does not know, thereof one should remain silent." -- L.
> Wittgenstein
>
in another context: ...thereof one should try knowing.
Barry Margolin
>In article <3D639C0A...@hotmail.com>,
>Will Deakin <aniso...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>Christopher Browne wrote:
>>> That sure _looks_ like a beggar...
>>That may be true. But that isn't exactly how I read Barry Margolin's
>>use of the saying "beggars can't be choosers"[1]. Hey ho.
>
>Barry was pretty adamantly explicit that "beggar" in
>this context was not metaphorical. Given that, why are
>you going to this bizzare effort involving Zen
>koans and discussions of unrelated English idioms to
>attempt to salvage something that was clearly not
>Barry's intent?
The OP said he's from a poor country, and he was asking for Lisp vendors to
drop their prices by an order of magnitude for their benefit. He's
essentially asking for a handout worth most of the price of the software,
because he's too poor to pay the full price. The only significant
difference between this and a street beggar is that you know what he's
going to buy with the money you've given him (it's more like giving him a
gift certificate, rather than cash).
ilias
>
> A while ago I posted a message complaining about the absence of good
> free compilers for Lisp.
thelifter.
please drop me an email.
if i choose LISP, i can maybe arrange something for you.
Raymond Wiker
> the only thing that connects me with the people here in c.l.l. is the
> fact that we belong to the same species.
>
>
> i feel shame for what i hear from some posters in this newsgroups.
>
> shame, for what is called human.
1) You have not made a single meaningful contribution to what
is actually the topic of this newsgroup.
2) You have also been unable or unwilling to make use of any
of the responses you have got here.
Now, what exactly is your reason for posting your drivel here?
--
Raymond Wiker Mail: Raymon...@fast.no
Senior Software Engineer Web: http://www.fast.no/
Fast Search & Transfer ASA Phone: +47 23 01 11 60
P.O. Box 1677 Vika Fax: +47 35 54 87 99
NO-0120 Oslo, NORWAY Mob: +47 48 01 11 60
Try FAST Search: http://alltheweb.com/
Raymond Toy
Barry> So if you can't afford a Windows CL, but there's a Linux CL that you can
Barry> afford, you either switch to Linux or do without. Vendors are under no
Barry> obligation to lower their prices just so poor customers can afford their
Barry> products (except in some regulated industries -- most utilities in the US
Barry> are required to provide "lifeline" services, so that poor customers can get
Barry> these necessities, but Common Lisp is not yet considered a necessity).
Indeed.
I do, however, like what some publishers do: they have
"international" versions of books for sale outside the US for
significantly less money than what they sell it for in the US. I wish
they would do that in the US because I'd buy a lot more books that
way. As it is, they get nothing, unless I happen find some book I
want when I'm traveling abroad.
Ray
ilias
> ilias <at_...@pontos.net> writes:
>
>
>>the only thing that connects me with the people here in c.l.l. is the
>>fact that we belong to the same species.
>>
>>
>>i feel shame for what i hear from some posters in this newsgroups.
>>
>>shame, for what is called human.
>
>
> 1) You have not made a single meaningful contribution to what
> is actually the topic of this newsgroup.
> 2) You have also been unable or unwilling to make use of any
> of the responses you have got here.
false.
> Now, what exactly is your reason for posting your drivel here?
learning.
Barry Margolin
Raymond Toy <t...@rtp.ericsson.se> wrote:
>I do, however, like what some publishers do: they have
>"international" versions of books for sale outside the US for
>significantly less money than what they sell it for in the US. I wish
>they would do that in the US because I'd buy a lot more books that
>way. As it is, they get nothing, unless I happen find some book I
>want when I'm traveling abroad.
You can't model software publishing on book or music publishing. Books
don't have ongoing support costs, professional software does. As long as
the price of a book is more than what it costs to print it, they're making
money, but software costs more than just the cost of burning a CD.
As for why they charge more for the books in the US, it's basic economics:
you charge what the market will bear, based on the supply/demand curves.
If they dropped the price by 10%, but that only increased purchases by 5%,
the total revenues goes down. You figure out the supply/demand curves, see
where they intersect, and that's how you set the price. Since the curves
are different in different markets, they intersect at different places, so
the prices are different (they maximize total revenue by optimizing each
market appropriately).
Will Deakin
> Given that, why are you going to this bizzare effort
> involving Zen koans and discussions of unrelated English
> idioms to attempt to salvage something that was clearly
> not Barry's intent?
:)w
Roger Corman
>So maybe the persons suggesting me to buy Corman Lisp for 200$ should
>be informed that 200$ is actually 50% of my monthly salary. In other
>words 200$ is a lot more for someone who earns 400$ a month than for
>someone who earns 4000$ a month.
>
>I think the problem goes deeper than that. I wonder if software
>vendors actually realize that income in poor countries is much lower
>than in rich countries(this also applies to company income).
I know this poster was just using Corman Lisp as an example, but since
it was mentioned I may as well respond.
Do you think software vendors are stupid? Of course we realize it.
I've traveled all over the world and am well aware of costs and
incomes in different places.
>So why
>not adjust the pricing accordingly? IMHO it simply makes no sense to
>charge the same price for a product all over the world. This is
>especially true for software where the cost of reproducing it is
>almost zero(consider download).
Yes the cost of reproducing it is very low, and barely figures into
license prices. However my cost to provide free downloads would be
more than you might think (the ISP hosting and costs do add up when
lots of people are downloading many megabytes from your site). There
are many costs associated with having a business, and here in
California our costs are very high even compared to most of the US.
I have considered charging a lower price in certain countries, but I
feel the same responsibility to a customer regardless of where they
are, to provide some sort of technical support, patches and updates.
We often provide support even for unlicensed users, although don't
feel the same responsibility. This responsibility requires resources
which are finite and have a significant cost, in san francisco bay
area dollars. The price we ask for licenses is a bare minimum we feel
we can afford.
Another problem with varying pricing is that the Internet marketplace
makes it difficult to know what country a user is located in, and what
country a product will be used in.
>A higher price will cause the software to be pirated. In the country I
>live you can buy any software CD from professional pirates for just 2
>US$.
Well by that logic are you saying software vendors have to charge less
than $2?
>And to be honest I don't blame the guys copying software for their
>private use.
Neither do I. That's one reason that Corman Lisp allows the compiler
to be used for private use only without paying a fee. Yet you were
just complaining it was too expensive. I assume then you were not
talking about using it for private use only, or were referring to the
IDE being too expensive. One can use a different editor.
>Especially if you are not using the software
>professionaly but only to educate yourself. In a sense I think its
>like a hungry person stealing food. You can't blame someone for
>stealing food if he has no money to buy it.
And to the Lisp junkie, I assume Corman Lisp is their food. :-)
Finally, if you had ever actually contacted us with your concerns
about pricing, you may have discovered that we can negotiate pricing
in special circumstances. I suspect other software vendors may do that
as well.
Roger Corman
Will Deakin
> Will wrote:
>> ilias wrote:
>>>> Why? It is the joy and challenge of dealing and simplifying
>>>> complexity that makes life worth living.
>>> ...i agree fully, limited by 'not always' and 'not only'.
>> No. Not limited by anything.
> for *you*.
>
> for *me*:
> *yes*.
> i agree...
> limited by...
>
> sorry.
not upset if people don't agree with me.
> think. indeep. context. calm.
:) I like this...
>> I would prefer to characterise it as a leg pull.
> still unfriendly.
Maybe where you stand. Where I am from a "leg pull" is a sign of
acceptance or friendliness.
>>> i'm basicly here, to analyze LISP (and so: the folks around LISP)
>> This sounds like some form of therapy ;)
> no. it is a form of 'joy and challenge in dealing and simplifying
> complexity'
Cool. I'll have some of this too.
>> What do you mean by attack?
> an verbal attack. being offensive. beiing unfriendly.
Since I've never spoken to you, tried to hurt or abuse you and am not
aquainted with you, I would humble suggest that I and alot of other
people on c.l.l. haven't attacked you.
>>> maybe some others are not sure, too.
>> Let them speak for themselves.
> as you let B.M. speak for hisself?
Hmmm. I *think* I made it explicit that I was not speaking for
*anybody* else. I thinks there may be some confusion about the medium
we are using here. This is an open forum where I or anybody else can
interject at any point.
> typical for c.l.l., you cut my post:
Ouch ;)
> this you forget:
>>> maybe the topic-poster (thelifter) understands it wrong, too.
>>> that was the main reason why i ask the poster B.M. to clarify.
Sure. It was because I couldn't remember if amnesia was an inalienable
right or not...
> i should let him speak for himself, e?
I would ask you to, yes. But if you don't then there is little I, or
anybody else, can do about it. So I will simply have to get over it.
> i tend to protect the weak, if i see savages around them.
(sigh). Beautiful thought. Beautiful dream. (sigh)
:)w
"It is better to ask some of the questions, than to know all of the
answers" -- James Thurber
Michael Sullivan
Pretty much.
The point of the saying is that when you are asking for things as a
favor ("begging"), it's a bit cheeky to follow that by turning up your
nose at what's offered and insist on something different/better.
"Beggars can't be choosers" usually means "You're being awfully picky
for someone who is asking that others serve him for nothing in return."
It's not as though there are no free Lisp compilers. What there aren't
is free compilers which are the best, fastest, easiest to use, are
easiest to package final products with and have all the most powerful
bleeding edge features available and runs on the OS you happen to like.
Well, tough. It's not as though you can't learn an up-to-date CL on
what's available for free, except on very small market or obsolete OSs,
or on a mac that won't do X, which is already pretty close to obsolete
as a commercial development environment (if not yet for users).
Michael
--
Michael Sullivan
Business Card Express of CT Thermographers to the Trade
Cheshire, CT mic...@bcect.com
Dorai Sitaram
Barry Margolin <bar...@genuity.net> wrote:
>In article <4nn0rgq...@rtp.ericsson.se>,
>Raymond Toy <t...@rtp.ericsson.se> wrote:
>>I do, however, like what some publishers do: they have
>>"international" versions of books for sale outside the US for
>>significantly less money than what they sell it for in the US. I wish
>>they would do that in the US because I'd buy a lot more books that
>>way. As it is, they get nothing, unless I happen find some book I
>>want when I'm traveling abroad.
>
>You can't model software publishing on book or music publishing. Books
>don't have ongoing support costs, professional software does. As long as
>the price of a book is more than what it costs to print it, they're making
>money, but software costs more than just the cost of burning a CD.
Doesn't the equivalence between book and software get
restored if everyone understands that the vendors
will not be selling "ongoing support" at a low
price?
Note that I am not saying vendors (especially those of
Common Lisp, given my attachment to the alternatives)
should sell low to the third world. I just didn't
follow your logic in claiming that software as a
commodity is so dramatically different from books.
Barry Margolin
>Doesn't the equivalence between book and software get
>restored if everyone understands that the vendors
>will not be selling "ongoing support" at a low
>price?
Yes. And that model works OK for some software, like games, which is why
they're often as cheap as paperback books.
That's why I repeatedly used the phrase "professional software", to
distinguish it from commodity software. Vendors of complex software like
this *expect* their customers to need support. They know that they can't
provide all the answers in the documentation, so ongoing support is assumed
to be part of the product. Their target customer base is developers of
complex applications, and they envision an ongoing partnership
relationship.
An analogy would be the difference between a consumer word processor and a
professional typesetting application. The former is intended for the mass
market, and should be inexpensive. The latter is targeted towards
newspapers and publishers, who have specialized needs: they're likely to
need customizations, technical assistance in time for deadlines, etc. The
vendor designs their business model based on the target market. Trying to
be everything to everyone is difficult, so you focus on a particular
subset.
Espen Vestre
> So if you can't afford a Windows CL, but there's a Linux CL that you can
> afford, you either switch to Linux or do without.
And if you can't afford $200 for a CL, I don't understand how you can
afford to own a legal Windows copy and the hardware necessary to run
it (compared to what you need to run linux)...
--
(espen)
Barry Margolin
Maybe he blew all of his budget on the computer and OS, so that's why he
need cheap software to run on it.
Christopher Browne
> In article <kw3ct7n...@merced.netfonds.no>,
> Espen Vestre <espen@*do-not-spam-me*.vestre.net> wrote:
>>Barry Margolin <bar...@genuity.net> writes:
>>
>>> So if you can't afford a Windows CL, but there's a Linux CL that you can
>>> afford, you either switch to Linux or do without.
>>
>>And if you can't afford $200 for a CL, I don't understand how you can
>>afford to own a legal Windows copy and the hardware necessary to run
>>it (compared to what you need to run linux)...
>
> Maybe he blew all of his budget on the computer and OS, so that's why he
> need cheap software to run on it.
In that case, there are proverbs going back thousands of years that
ought to be mentioned, along the lines of
"For which of you, intending to build a tower, sitteth not down
first, and counteth the cost, whether he have sufficient to finish
it?"
The risks involved do include ridicule, as those that see the
half-built tower are likely to mock the builder for being so bad at
budgeting.
--
(reverse (concatenate 'string "moc.enworbbc@" "enworbbc"))
http://www3.sympatico.ca/cbbrowne/linuxdistributions.html
"There are two ways of constructing a software design: One way is to
make it so simple that there are obviously no deficiencies, and the
other way is to make it so complicated that there are no obvious
deficiencies. The first method is far more difficult."
-- C.A.R. Hoare
Erik Naggum
| Maybe he blew all of his budget on the computer and OS, so that's why he
| need cheap software to run on it.
People actually think this will work with computers, but they somehow
realize that if they buy the latest, greatest model of a car, they might not
have money left for gas. There is no organized public movement for free gas
or free electricity for the computers. There ought to be, if the new economy
had any meaning at all.
--
Erik Naggum, Oslo, Norway
Act from reason, and failure makes you rethink and study harder.
Act from faith, and failure makes you blame someone and push harder.
Christopher C. Stacy
Espen> Barry Margolin <bar...@genuity.net> writes:
>> So if you can't afford a Windows CL, but there's a Linux CL that you can
>> afford, you either switch to Linux or do without.
Espen> And if you can't afford $200 for a CL, I don't understand how
Espen> you can afford to own a legal Windows copy and the hardware
Espen> necessary to run it (compared to what you need to run linux)...
Maybe because approximately all Intel computers are shipped with Windows
on them, and therefore you don't go out and purchase it seperately?
(Yes, I know you can special-order a Linux PC from some places,
and sometimes even without also paying for the bundled Windows
operating software that will be erased. That's not the point.)
I agree that $200 is not unreasonable for a development environment,
but I fail to understand how anyone could fail to understand how
someone could afford Windows but not afford additional software.
thelifter
deserve a response.
ro...@corman.net (Roger Corman) wrote in message news:<3d63e327....@nntp.sonic.net>...
> Do you think software vendors are stupid? Of course we realize it.
> I've traveled all over the world and am well aware of costs and
> incomes in different places.
No, my original post was intended to be more a reply to a particular
critic. But of course I also wanted to educate some people who perhaps
didn't realize that there is difference in income. I think not
everyone has travelled as much as you.
> I have considered charging a lower price in certain countries, but I
> feel the same responsibility to a customer regardless of where they
> are, to provide some sort of technical support, patches and updates.
> We often provide support even for unlicensed users, although don't
> feel the same responsibility. This responsibility requires resources
> which are finite and have a significant cost, in san francisco bay
> area dollars. The price we ask for licenses is a bare minimum we feel
> we can afford.
I think many customers would feel comfortable with the deal: get it
for cheap but without support, or pay more for support.
>
> Another problem with varying pricing is that the Internet marketplace
> makes it difficult to know what country a user is located in, and what
> country a product will be used in.
Do you need to know? Put it in the license: this software is licensed
to be used in <country x>. Of course that won't stop abusers from
using it in <country y>, but then what can you do to stop pirates?
>
> >A higher price will cause the software to be pirated. In the country I
> >live you can buy any software CD from professional pirates for just 2
> >US$.
> Well by that logic are you saying software vendors have to charge less
> than $2?
No. But to those who called me a beggar(missing my point entirely
btw): I don't need to beg for what I can get for (almost) nothing.
>
> >And to be honest I don't blame the guys copying software for their
> >private use.
> Neither do I. That's one reason that Corman Lisp allows the compiler
> to be used for private use only without paying a fee. Yet you were
> just complaining it was too expensive. I assume then you were not
> talking about using it for private use only, or were referring to the
> IDE being too expensive. One can use a different editor.
Sorry, I was not critisizing Corman Lisp. I was just trying to make a
general statement in response to a general criticism.
>
> >Especially if you are not using the software
> >professionaly but only to educate yourself. In a sense I think its
> >like a hungry person stealing food. You can't blame someone for
> >stealing food if he has no money to buy it.
> And to the Lisp junkie, I assume Corman Lisp is their food. :-)
>
> Finally, if you had ever actually contacted us with your concerns
> about pricing, you may have discovered that we can negotiate pricing
> in special circumstances. I suspect other software vendors may do that
> as well.
Thanks, that is good to know.
The (weight)Lifter
Espen Vestre
> (Yes, I know you can special-order a Linux PC from some places,
not only "from some places". Even Wal-Mart is now delivering PCs
without Windows.
--
(espen)
Dorai Sitaram
Indeed, it is nowadays quite easy to get an x86 system
that has no OS at all (eg, markonecomputers.com, and
other consumer-reviewed ones at resellerratings.com).
You can buy an inexpensive Unixoid OS separately
and install it. It doesn't require druid-level
knowledge to do this anymore.
But this is in the US. I doubt that third-world
consumers -- which is what this thread is about -- have
the same opportunity to sidestep Windows altogether.
I'd be happy to be proven wrong.
Paolo Amoroso
> >>>>> "PA" == Paolo Amoroso <amo...@mclink.it> writes:
> [...]
> PA> There is so much free-speech/gratis software available, even
> PA> in the Lisp world, that your claims are unbelievable. If you
> PA> mentions Corman Lisp, it looks like you are using Windows. If
> PA> so, why don't you use Linux or one of the xBSD variants?
[...]
> This seems to be a problem. People do not seem inclined to go the
> xBSD or Linux route if they have always been on MS OSs. We couln't
If so, they should at least have the decency of blaming _themselves_ for
this, not the free or commercial software community.
Paolo
--
EncyCMUCLopedia * Extensive collection of CMU Common Lisp documentation
http://www.paoloamoroso.it/ency/README
Tim Bradshaw
> But this is in the US. I doubt that third-world
> consumers -- which is what this thread is about -- have
> the same opportunity to sidestep Windows altogether.
> I'd be happy to be proven wrong.
Well, is it about consumers? People buying Lisp systems are
presumably planning on writing software with them, not just surfing
the web and word processing.
It seems to me that this price thing cuts both ways. If I'm in the
developing world and I plan to sell some software, I can probably
price it for the US/European market. So because my wages costs &c are
low, I can make an absolute killing. It should be no problem for me
to justify the purchase of a development environment for a few hundred
dollars.
If I'm *not* planning on selling SW, then the existing free systems,
or the free versions of commercial systems, should be just fine
(indeed the free systems may be just fine for developing commercial
stuff - Paul Graham used CLISP, why shouldn't anyone else?). I've
taught people Lisp where they used the free version of a commercial
system, and it was a complete non-problem.
But of course, it's easier to sit around and complain.
--tim
Paul F. Dietz
> But this is in the US. I doubt that third-world
> consumers -- which is what this thread is about -- have
> the same opportunity to sidestep Windows altogether.
> I'd be happy to be proven wrong.
I'd have thought that do-it-yourself computers would
be relatively more common in lesser developed countries,
simply because the labor of the person custom-assembling
the computer is cheaper. The machines might be assembled out
of lagging-edge parts, granted.
Perhaps the answer to the question 'why won't they
pay X$ for Lisp when they've already paid Y$ for Windows?'
is that maybe they *didn't* pay for Windows. Piracy is
common in some countries.
Paul
Espen Vestre
> But this is in the US. I doubt that third-world
> consumers -- which is what this thread is about -- have
> the same opportunity to sidestep Windows altogether.
> I'd be happy to be proven wrong.
I think you're wrong, but I don't have proofs.
But maybe an example of a mainland china computer maker that delivers
their pcs with linux preinstalled will make you a little happier?
(http://www.greatwall.com.cn/eng/product/pc-junfen.htm)
--
(espen)
Dorai Sitaram
I don't know why you think I'm complaining about
commercial Common Lisp pricing in the third world or
otherwise. I have already stated quite clearly that I
am not at all for commercial Common Lisps to be sold
cheap to third-world consumers.
Tim Bradshaw
I'm sorry, this was very poorly phrased by me. I did not intend to
say that you were complaining, rather I intended to refer to posters
further back in the thread who (I think) were.
Again, I'm sorry, I should have been clearer.
--tim
Christopher C. Stacy
Dorai> In article <kwhehmd...@merced.netfonds.no>,
Dorai> Espen Vestre <espen@*do-not-spam-me*.vestre.net> wrote:
>> cst...@dtpq.com (Christopher C. Stacy) writes:
>>
>>> (Yes, I know you can special-order a Linux PC from some places,
>>
>> not only "from some places". Even Wal-Mart is now delivering PCs
>> without Windows.
Dorai> Indeed, it is nowadays quite easy to get an x86 system
Dorai> that has no OS at all (eg, markonecomputers.com, and
Dorai> other consumer-reviewed ones at resellerratings.com).
Dorai> You can buy an inexpensive Unixoid OS separately
Dorai> and install it. It doesn't require druid-level
Dorai> knowledge to do this anymore.
It's a tautology that if your goal is to deliver an application to
ordinary consumers, or in general to most computers, then running
Unix isn't going to provide a solution that avoids Windows.
So, what was the point?
Petr Swedock
> Dorai Sitaram wrote:
>
> > But this is in the US. I doubt that third-world
> > consumers -- which is what this thread is about -- have
> > the same opportunity to sidestep Windows altogether.
> > I'd be happy to be proven wrong.
>
> I'd have thought that do-it-yourself computers would
> be relatively more common in lesser developed countries,
> simply because the labor of the person custom-assembling
> the computer is cheaper. The machines might be assembled out
> of lagging-edge parts, granted.
What an interesting coincidence:
http://slashdot.org/articles/02/08/23/1417254.shtml?tid=126
About the third world using the first world's leftover computer
parts...
Peace,
Petr
Tim Bradshaw
> It's a tautology that if your goal is to deliver an application to
> ordinary consumers, or in general to most computers, then running
> Unix isn't going to provide a solution that avoids Windows.
Well, if you're aiming to produce a product which is used by lots of
people who can afford Windows PCs, then presumably you can afford to
buy one, and the other components of a development environment,
because you will be getting paid - either you're producing traditional
commercial software, or you are producing free software and whatever
mechanism that pays for the time of all the other people writing free
software will pay for your time too.
The only two ways I can see that people can't afford a development
environment is that they are aiming their software *only* at people
with no money (say some product which is only of interest in the third
world), or if they don't intend to produce anything at all.
--tim
Paolo Amoroso
wrote:
> It's a tautology that if your goal is to deliver an application to
> ordinary consumers, or in general to most computers, then running
> Unix isn't going to provide a solution that avoids Windows.
>
> So, what was the point?
The original poster is apparently interested in using Lisp under Windows
for educational purposes.
ilias
>>>>>Why? It is the joy and challenge of dealing and simplifying
>>>>>complexity that makes life worth living.
>>>>...i agree fully, limited by 'not always' and 'not only'.
>>>No. Not limited by anything.
>>for *you*.
>>
>>for *me*:
>>*yes*.
>>i agree...
>>limited by...
>>sorry.
> Why be sorry? I feel pleased that we know where each of us stands. I'm
> not upset if people don't agree with me.
>>think. indeep. context. calm.
> :) I like this...
ok
>>>I would prefer to characterise it as a leg pull.
>>still unfriendly.
> Maybe where you stand. Where I am from a "leg pull" is a sign of
> acceptance or friendliness.
ok
>>>>i'm basicly here, to analyze LISP (and so: the folks around LISP)
>>>This sounds like some form of therapy ;)
>>no. it is a form of 'joy and challenge in dealing and simplifying
>>complexity'
> Cool. I'll have some of this too.
ok. => [simplifying complexity]
>>>What do you mean by attack?
>>an verbal attack. being offensive. beiing unfriendly.
[verbal attack]
> Since I've never spoken to you,
*you*
*others* have
> tried to hurt or abuse you and am not
> aquainted with you, I would humble suggest that
> I and alot of other people on c.l.l. haven't attacked you.
false.
*you* haven't.
*others* have.
>>>>maybe some others are not sure, too.
>>>Let them speak for themselves.
>>as you let B.M. speak for hisself?
> Hmmm. I *think* I made it explicit that I was not speaking for
> *anybody* else. I thinks there may be some confusion about the medium
> we are using here. This is an open forum where I or anybody else can
> interject at any point.
of course. => [free interjection for anybody]
your 'Let them speak for themselves' => [don't interject]
my 'as you let B.M. speak for hisself?' => [didn't you interject?]
>>typical for c.l.l., you cut my post:
> Ouch ;)
ok
>>this you forget:
>>>>maybe the topic-poster (thelifter) understands it wrong, too.
>>>>that was the main reason why i ask the poster B.M. to clarify.
> Sure. It was because I couldn't remember if amnesia was an inalienable
> right or not...
[simplifying complexity]
>>i should let him speak for himself, e?
> I would ask you to, yes. But if you don't then there is little I, or
> anybody else, can do about it. So I will simply have to get over it.
of course you have to.
[free interjection for anybody]
>>i tend to protect the weak, if i see savages around them.
> (sigh). Beautiful thought. Beautiful dream. (sigh)
of course.