These are interesting points and I think it comes close to pointing out the 
reason.  For me the reasons commercial Linux software fails are:

- Most people will not pay unless they have to.  This is not usually 
malicious or dishonest, it is natural.  Someone gets a program that solves a 
problem for them that "cost nothing."  Sending in some money to the developer 
is not a high priority.  The problem is solved, it no longer "squeaks" and so 
the developer is forgotten.

- Voluntarily contributions when the "item" can be had without cash layout 
goes against self-interest.  "Have your solution and keep your money too."  
This is very hard to overcome.  We face it all the time in the "you"ser group 
when requests come in for specific events or classes but no one steps up to 
spend the time and money to put it together.  The ideas or requests are not 
bad, there just is not the willing funding in money or time to do them.

- This community of open/free software users does not want to pay.  Either 
they are like Derek and support only free (as in freedom) software or they 
expect open code.  And, if they cannot get something without payment, they do 
without or makes up their own solution rather than pay.

The bottom line is that the culture of Linux is contrary to commercial 
enterpise and selfish human nature.  So, a commercial software company, 
writing for the Linux market faces even greater odds against success 
than companies targeting the Windows market.  And the odds of success in the 
Windows market is not very high either, even without the culture working 
against it.

All that negativity being said, let me say that I find that the things that 
are and have been accomplished by the open/free software community are 
commendable and even astounding!  The things that PLUG accomplishes are at 
the same level.  For no dues, no fee, no cost to me but the time to ask it, I 
can have any question answered or worked on by any number of people perfectly 
willing to help.  Companies like SuSE and RedHat and IBM are willing to foot 
the bill on development of software that I directly benefit from at no cost 
to me.  Real value added to my life by people I don't know done willingly 
just for the "fun of it."  Amazing!  Cool!

My hot air will stop after one anecdote: I was talking to a product manager 
about using CVS for version control.  He was in total disbelief that the 
"cost" for the program was $0.  "Why would anyone write a good program and 
just hand it out for free?!?"  His conclusion was that it must not be a good 
program otherwise it would cost money.  (Huh?!?!)

The open/free software community has just the opposite reaction to closed 
commercial software.  They will not consider it because it is against 
"principle" or they don't want to lay out cash up front.  Even if spending $ 
on a license will save $$$$ over the next year.

Neither position is right or wrong, just extreme.

To directly answer the question on the subject line: Yes I would.  If the 
solution provided is worth more than the cost of the license, sure I would 
pay it.  Only after I found that there were no acceptable free alternatives.  
;^)

Alan

On Sunday 25 November 2001 03:53 pm, you wrote:
> No.  It defeats teh purpose.  Rewaqrding someone for 'license' fees is not
> a good thing.  However, I have regularly written checks to companies that
> produce free software independent of a 'license'.  I have for example
> bought a redhat boxed set.
>
> I.e. I will pay money for commercial grade 'free software', but i will not
> pay money for ANY non-free software.
>
> They dont understand our community.  Our community is not about 'leasing
> the privelege of using a vendors software'.  Until the vendors understand
> that they will not make money selling leases to closed software on an
> open/free platform.
>
> -Derek
>
> ________________________________________________
> See http://PLUG.phoenix.az.us/navigator-mail.shtml if your mail doesn't
> post to the list quickly and you use Netscape to write mail.
>
> PLUG-discuss mailing list  -  PLUG-discuss@lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us
> http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss