An Open Source VB?

[Mark Alexander Bertenshaw]

G'day -

I have a background in VB, but have recently been looking at Java. This has
led me to read about the concept of Open Source, copyleft et al. I hadn't
realised how much work had been done by some of these guys - it's quite incredible.
Unfortunately, it is being done by such a minority group. And a lot of these
people seem to have an unfortunate tendency to look down on certain groups.
For instance, in the otherwise enlightening "How To Become A Hacker" (http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/faqs/hacker-howto.html),
Eric S. Raymond has this to say:

----------------------------------------------------------
Are Visual Basic or Delphi good languages to start with?

No, because they're not portable. There are no open-source implementations
of these languages, so you'd be locked into only those platforms the vendor
chooses to support. Accepting that kind of monopoly situation is not the
hacker way.
Visual Basic is especially awful. The fact that it's a proprietary Microsoft
language is enough to disqualify it, and like other Basics it's a poorly-designed
language that will teach you bad programming habits.

One of those bad habits is becoming dependent on a single vendor's libraries,
widgets, and development tools. In general, any language that isn't supported
under at least three different vendors' operating systems is a poor one to
learn to hack in.
----------------------------------------------------------

Well, when I first read this, I thought "typical C headed bigot". I must
assume that as Mr. Raymond is some sort of leader in the "Open Source community"
that this must be a generally held view. A lot of the other in the document
made a lot of sense to me and I can see a lot of what Mr. Raymond describes,
such as freedom of ideas and helping your fellow hacker in what must be a
terrible place, the devx.vb hierarchy of newsgroups. It also occurs to me
that these people are never going to "win" unless they get the hearts and
minds of us who work with these "evil" languages. Think about the number
of VB programmers there must be! And then I got thinking about his statement:

"There are no open-source implementations of these languages, so you'd be
locked into only those platforms the vendor chooses to support."

And I thought, wouldn't it be cool if there <was> a kind of open source implementation
of VB - call it VeeBee Basic or something. That way, I and 000's of other
developers could write code that worked on any platform. It would also make
the moaning about the next version of VB redundant - we could add the new
features ourselves! It would be hard (you would have to write implementations
of Win32 and COM to be complete), but this undertaking IMHO would be far
more important than any other Open Source project. But I suspect the tragedy
would be that the thought of touching a "Microsoft Language" would be anathema
to too many "real" programmers.

-------------------------
Mark Alexander Bertenshaw
Programmer/Analyst
Prime Response
Brentford
UK

[Bill Davis]

mark.bertenshaw@virgin.net (Mark Alexander Bertenshaw) wrote in
<394e1c2b$1@news.devx.com>:
..
..
..
>And I thought, wouldn't it be cool if there <was> a kind of open source
>implementation of VB - call it VeeBee Basic or something. That way, I
>and 000's of other developers could write code that worked on any
>platform. It would also make the moaning about the next version of VB
>redundant - we could add the new features ourselves! It would be hard
>(you would have to write implementations of Win32 and COM to be
>complete), but this undertaking IMHO would be far more important than
>any other Open Source project. But I suspect the tragedy would be that
>the thought of touching a "Microsoft Language" would be anathema to too
>many "real" programmers.
>
>-------------------------
>Mark Alexander Bertenshaw
>Programmer/Analyst
>Prime Response
>Brentford
>UK
>
>

Mark,

Check out www.python.org and www.oreilly.com's Python information.

Not quite VB (yet), but getting there... Open source, portable. There is a
version of Python based on the Java Virtual Machine, which means it can run
just about anywhere Java does. At least one of the Windows versions can do
COM (which makes it unportable, but allows it to work with MTS, MSMQ,
etc...). It also has more object oriented features than VB.

--
Bill Davis, MCSD, Sun Certified Programmer

[Mark Alexander Bertenshaw]

Bill -

Sounds interesting (and I think that this is the language that Raymond was
favouring), but unfortunately this is not very like VB. The Open Source guys
ought to be working on getting people like me involved in their work, regardless
of whether the actual language I work with meets their concept of a "real
language".

>Check out www.python.org and www.oreilly.com's Python
>information.
>
>Not quite VB (yet), but getting there... Open source, portable. There is
a
>version of Python based on the Java Virtual Machine, which means it can
run
>just about anywhere Java does. At least one of the Windows versions can
do
>COM (which makes it unportable, but allows it to work with MTS, MSMQ,
>etc...). It also has more object oriented features than VB.
>
>--
>Bill Davis, MCSD, Sun Certified Programmer

-------------------------
Mark Alexander Bertenshaw
Programmer/Analyst
Prime Response
Brentford
UK

[Chris Sibert]

I'm in agreement. I would like to see a language that has the syntactical
practicality of VB, with the universality of a language like Java. Coding
in the 40 year old arcane syntax of C-like languages is too difficult for
most VB programmers to consider.
I would like to see a Basic++ with full object orientation, and open source,
cross platform capability. It doesn't seem that the language designers can
figure out that confusing syntax is not good. Basic is far superior in this
regard.


"Mark Alexander Bertenshaw" <mark.bertenshaw@virgin.net> wrote:
>
>Bill -
>
>Sounds interesting (and I think that this is the language that Raymond was
>favouring), but unfortunately this is not very like VB. The Open Source
guys
>ought to be working on getting people like me involved in their work, regardless
>of whether the actual language I work with meets their concept of a "real
>language".
>
>>Check out www.python.org and www.oreilly.com's Python
>>information.
>>
>>Not quite VB (yet), but getting there... Open source, portable. There is
>a
>>version of Python based on the Java Virtual Machine, which means it can
>run
>>just about anywhere Java does. At least one of the Windows versions can
>do
>>COM (which makes it unportable, but allows it to work with MTS, MSMQ,
>>etc...). It also has more object oriented features than VB.
>>
>>--
>>Bill Davis, MCSD, Sun Certified Programmer
>
>-------------------------
>Mark Alexander Bertenshaw
>Programmer/Analyst
>Prime Response
>Brentford
>UK
>

[MK]

I'm sorry, guys, but I'm tired to hear again and again that C++ is difficult.
Nave you tried? Spend a weekend, read "Annotated Reference Manual" by Stroustrup
and Ellis just once - you'll see that VB is not *that* different and C++
is not that *difficult*. May be you'll switch to C++ then.

"Chris Sibert" <sibertc@nationwidemoney.com> wrote:
>
>I'm in agreement. I would like to see a language that has the syntactical
>practicality of VB, with the universality of a language like Java. Coding
>in the 40 year old arcane syntax of C-like languages is too difficult for
>most VB programmers to consider.
>I would like to see a Basic++ with full object orientation, and open source,
>cross platform capability. It doesn't seem that the language designers can
>figure out that confusing syntax is not good. Basic is far superior in this
>regard.
>
>
>"Mark Alexander Bertenshaw" <mark.bertenshaw@virgin.net> wrote:
>>
>>Bill -
>>
>>Sounds interesting (and I think that this is the language that Raymond
was
>>favouring), but unfortunately this is not very like VB. The Open Source
>guys
>>ought to be working on getting people like me involved in their work, regardless
>>of whether the actual language I work with meets their concept of a "real
>>language".
>>
>>>Check out www.python.org and www.oreilly.com's Python
>>>information.
>>>
>>>Not quite VB (yet), but getting there... Open source, portable. There
is
>>a
>>>version of Python based on the Java Virtual Machine, which means it can
>>run
>>>just about anywhere Java does. At least one of the Windows versions can
>>do
>>>COM (which makes it unportable, but allows it to work with MTS, MSMQ,

>>>etc...). It also has more object oriented features than VB.
>>>
>>>--
>>>Bill Davis, MCSD, Sun Certified Programmer
>>
>>-------------------------
>>Mark Alexander Bertenshaw
>>Programmer/Analyst
>>Prime Response
>>Brentford
>>UK
>>
>

[DevTeam]

I agree, I purchased "C++ Programming Language 3rd ed." from BJarne
Stroustrup and conclude that C++ don't differ so much from Vb, or in the way
that I program and design. The biggest trouble is the inavailability of a
good framwork, C++ is portable, creating a good framework for each OS that
you want. We are currently porting applications from Win32 to BeOS, thanks
that we choose to design a proprietary framework, for me, better and more
faster and clean than MFC, mimmick in part of the APi of BeOS.

Just my 2 cents.

DevTeam
MMedia Systems

Download BeOS free!!!
http://free.be.com

"MK" <mikeklim@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:39517f46$1@news.devx.com...
>
> I'm sorry, guys, but I'm tired to hear again and again that C++ is
difficult.
> Nave you tried? Spend a weekend, read "Annotated Reference Manual" by
Stroustrup
> and Ellis just once - you'll see that VB is not *that* different and C++
> is not that *difficult*. May be you'll switch to C++ then.
>
> "Chris Sibert" <sibertc@nationwidemoney.com> wrote:
> >
> >I'm in agreement. I would like to see a language that has the syntactical
> >practicality of VB, with the universality of a language like Java. Coding
> >in the 40 year old arcane syntax of C-like languages is too difficult for
> >most VB programmers to consider.
> >I would like to see a Basic++ with full object orientation, and open
source,
> >cross platform capability. It doesn't seem that the language designers
can
> >figure out that confusing syntax is not good. Basic is far superior in
this
> >regard.
> >
> >
> >"Mark Alexander Bertenshaw" <mark.bertenshaw@virgin.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>Bill -
> >>
> >>Sounds interesting (and I think that this is the language that Raymond
> was
> >>favouring), but unfortunately this is not very like VB. The Open Source
> >guys
> >>ought to be working on getting people like me involved in their work,
regardless
> >>of whether the actual language I work with meets their concept of a
"real
> >>language".
> >>
> >>>Check out www.python.org and www.oreilly.com's Python
> >>>information.
> >>>
> >>>Not quite VB (yet), but getting there... Open source, portable. There
> is
> >>a
> >>>version of Python based on the Java Virtual Machine, which means it can
> >>run
> >>>just about anywhere Java does. At least one of the Windows versions can
> >>do
> >>>COM (which makes it unportable, but allows it to work with MTS, MSMQ,
>
> >>>etc...). It also has more object oriented features than VB.
> >>>
> >>>--
> >>>Bill Davis, MCSD, Sun Certified Programmer
> >>
> >>-------------------------
> >>Mark Alexander Bertenshaw
> >>Programmer/Analyst
> >>Prime Response
> >>Brentford
> >>UK
> >>
> >
>

[Mark Geisler]

Some VB programmers, like me (I actually develop in Java as well), see no
real value in open-source development communities. Microsoft gives us the
plumbing, and all we have to do is concentrate on writing the business logic.
Low-level languages and open source languages do not address this need.
In fact, most of the open-source zealots (snobs) don't even have a concept
of bringing a product to market or RAD. Even though I could squeeze a few
ounces of performance and scalability out of C++ server-components, it still
wouldn't be worth it to me. With VB I can write a web app that performs
well, and do it very quickly. If I design it right, I then can reuse the
VB server components in any other COM application. Dealing with Java's evolution
will expotentially increases our project development cycle. With VB, ASP,
Windows NT, Windows 2000 and SQL Server 7 I can build very sophisticated
and powerful web-apps that will work on any platform that supports HTTP,
HTML, and Javascript. With this capability, the value of open-source and
other socialist progamming communities is reduced to zero. I look at it
this way, do whatever you want to do on your Linux server and I will do what
I want on my NT server. Just keep your opinions about server to yourself,
because I don't want to languish in open-source, low-level ****. What I
do in 40 hours a week in VB is equivalent to what Java programmers do in
two weeks as far as production is concerned. That it just my biased, pointed,
and experienced opinion though. If a person has no experience with COM and
VB their opinion about them is worthless, period.

Mark G.
Web Application Developer

[Mark Alexander Bertenshaw]

MK -

If C++ is so easy, why are they bringing out "C#" ? <g>
If you have spent time programming VB, C++ is not a language you would want
to spend too much time with. I personally would like to learn C++, but I
keep on finding it heavy going. Now Java - that <is> a nice language.

-------------------------
Mark Alexander Bertenshaw
Programmer/Analyst
Prime Response
Brentford
UK


"MK" <mikeklim@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>I'm sorry, guys, but I'm tired to hear again and again that C++ is difficult.
>Nave you tried? Spend a weekend, read "Annotated Reference Manual" by Stroustrup
>and Ellis just once - you'll see that VB is not *that* different and C++
>is not that *difficult*. May be you'll switch to C++ then.
>
>"Chris Sibert" <sibertc@nationwidemoney.com> wrote:
>>
>>I'm in agreement. I would like to see a language that has the syntactical
>>practicality of VB, with the universality of a language like Java. Coding
>>in the 40 year old arcane syntax of C-like languages is too difficult for
>>most VB programmers to consider.
>>I would like to see a Basic++ with full object orientation, and open source,
>>cross platform capability. It doesn't seem that the language designers
can
>>figure out that confusing syntax is not good. Basic is far superior in
this
>>regard.
>>
>>
>>"Mark Alexander Bertenshaw" <mark.bertenshaw@virgin.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>Bill -
>>>
>>>Sounds interesting (and I think that this is the language that Raymond
>was
>>>favouring), but unfortunately this is not very like VB. The Open Source
>>guys
>>>ought to be working on getting people like me involved in their work,
regardless
>>>of whether the actual language I work with meets their concept of a "real
>>>language".
>>>
>>>>Check out www.python.org and www.oreilly.com's Python
>>>>information.
>>>>
>>>>Not quite VB (yet), but getting there... Open source, portable. There
>is
>>>a
>>>>version of Python based on the Java Virtual Machine, which means it can
>>>run
>>>>just about anywhere Java does. At least one of the Windows versions can
>>>do
>>>>COM (which makes it unportable, but allows it to work with MTS, MSMQ,
>
>>>>etc...). It also has more object oriented features than VB.
>>>>
>>>>--
>>>>Bill Davis, MCSD, Sun Certified Programmer
>>>
>>>-------------------------
>>>Mark Alexander Bertenshaw
>>>Programmer/Analyst
>>>Prime Response
>>>Brentford
>>>UK
>>>
>>
>

[JasonL]

Mark,

Mark Alexander Bertenshaw <mark.bertenshaw@virgin.net> wrote
>I personally would like to learn C++, but I
> keep on finding it heavy going. Now Java - that <is> a nice language.
So far it looks that way. I've been playing with Java, and am considering
going heavy duty into it's use. It looks great.
Then ... I hear about this C# thing. Hmmm.... looks like Java, smells like
VB, sounds like C++... what is this thing?! If it is intended to keep VB/C++
guys from looking for greener Java pastures, it almost got my attention.
Any thoughts?
-JasonL

[Phil Weber]

> Then I hear about this C# thing...what is this thing?!

Jason: Sounds like the next version of Visual J++ to me.
---
Phil Weber

[DevTeam]

Mark, I'm not a "open-source" freak, I develop commercial Apps in the
multimedia field, don't like Linux, because it don't provide the functions
and hardware support that we need, period. I said that C++ don't differ from
VB too much, and C++ allow you make things portable, like develop
cross-plataform solutions, will not be excelent see your App running
everywhere? Mac, BeOS, NT, 95/98, etc.??? I do, with a good framework and a
little bit of effort to create the compilated version of that framework. I
use VB6 to design and create small things, fast and easy, but in the
multimedia field, we need more accurate tools, we will love Microsoft if
they provide a RTNT (RealTime NT) but they will not do. The market have
choosed Microsoft because it provide a wide range of tools, easiest ways to
program, etc., For that I love microsoft, but just for that, hate when found
a bug in version of VB and the cold ms only sent to me a "we have received
your post"... just that? so cold, to a user who purchase Universal MSDN? all
the VS enterprise editions, and active promote their products (developing
using Windows implies promoting them, or not?)

Just my two cents. any comments, just e.mail me, remove the .nospam from the
e.mail

DevTeam
MMedia Systems

"Mark Geisler" <mgeisler@teach.com> wrote in message
news:395527a6$1@news.devx.com...
>
> Some VB programmers, like me (I actually develop in Java as well), see no
> real value in open-source development communities. Microsoft gives us the
> plumbing, and all we have to do is concentrate on writing the business
logic.
> Low-level languages and open source languages do not address this need.
> In fact, most of the open-source zealots (snobs) don't even have a
concept
> of bringing a product to market or RAD. Even though I could squeeze a few
> ounces of performance and scalability out of C++ server-components, it
still
> wouldn't be worth it to me. With VB I can write a web app that performs
> well, and do it very quickly. If I design it right, I then can reuse the
> VB server components in any other COM application. Dealing with Java's
evolution
> will expotentially increases our project development cycle. With VB, ASP,
> Windows NT, Windows 2000 and SQL Server 7 I can build very sophisticated
> and powerful web-apps that will work on any platform that supports HTTP,
> HTML, and Javascript. With this capability, the value of open-source and
> other socialist progamming communities is reduced to zero. I look at it
> this way, do whatever you want to do on your Linux server and I will do
what
> I want on my NT server. Just keep your opinions about server to yourself,
> because I don't want to languish in open-source, low-level ****. What I
> do in 40 hours a week in VB is equivalent to what Java programmers do in
> two weeks as far as production is concerned. That it just my biased,
pointed,
> and experienced opinion though. If a person has no experience with COM
and
> VB their opinion about them is worthless, period.
>
> Mark G.
> Web Application Developer

[Tomas]

>>C++ allow you make things portable, like develop
cross-platform solutions, will not be excellent see your App running everywhere?
Mac, BeOS, NT, 95/98, etc.???

Remember C++, for the most part, is "cross platform" if it is a console app
using carefully selected C++ library functions.
At this point, many of the popular frameworks, like MFC, lock you totally
into Windows.

There are other C++ compiler vendors that have their own GUI building tools
that are cross platform capable. However, these do not seem to widely used.

When building a cross platform app, one must be very careful in how it is
implemented. Just because it is built in C++ does not mean it can run anywhere.


There are other tools, such as the soon to be released Delphi & C++ Builder
(Borland's Kylix). They will allow you to build Windows and Linux apps. However,
Borland must port the libraries to other operating systems.

My two cents...

Kylix Info:

http://www.gartner.com/webletter/inprise/index1.html

[Todd B]

Mark, Like you I have been reading quite a bit about open source but to
this day one question still nags at me. How the heck does anyone make
money so they can pay the bills and buy food?

Take Linux. There are a number of companies that now 'sell' it or at least
they package it and sell the box which happens to include Linux. They seem
to also have some type of support contract they offer to companies and
people that want to use Linux. Ok that is fine.. but you can only have so
many of those type companies.

Thus, what happens to every other programmer? Let's say every programmer
moves to Linux development whether it be C, C++ or whatever. Everything is
open source. Company A create programming tools, company B creates
programming tools and so on in every category. Obviously since it is open
source, they release it free and open to the world. What I want to know
is who pays for the time and other expenses for the 2 or 3 years of
development? After releasing the 'product' for free, where do they garner
revenue to stay in business?

There can only be so many 'companies' that offer 'support' for open source
and that make enough money from that to survive.

Your thread just made me think of this issue again so I figured I would put
the question out there. Can anyone reasonably explain how open source can
be beneficial in the type of economic world we have today? If we lived in
a world where money did not exist and everyone had what they needed without
the need for income, then sure. But for the life of me, I cannot see at all
why there is such a big push to go open source.

--

Sincerely,

Todd B

Confusion say * What goes around, Keeps going!*


"Mark Alexander Bertenshaw" <mark.bertenshaw@virgin.net> wrote in message
news:394e1c2b$1@news.devx.com...
>
> G'day -
>
> I have a background in VB, but have recently been looking at Java. This
has
> led me to read about the concept of Open Source, copyleft et al. I hadn't
> realised how much work had been done by some of these guys - it's quite
incredible.
> Unfortunately, it is being done by such a minority group. And a lot of
these
> people seem to have an unfortunate tendency to look down on certain
groups.
> For instance, in the otherwise enlightening "How To Become A Hacker"
(http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/faqs/hacker-howto.html),
> Eric S. Raymond has this to say:
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------

[spiker]

Todd,

Mark's idea is bad only in one respect.....VB.... the language is proprietary
to *Microsoft*....duh! He seemed to imply he was going to duplicate the
language and not pay for it or get MS to agree. Try that with JAVA and see
what McNeally does to your sorry *ss when you change a spec. I can't believe
Mark got quoted by DEVX. The truth is I wrote to the GNU site's FAQs guy
many moons ago and asked if you could have an 'open source community' around
VB and from a licensing point of view he saw no problem. That is if I posted
a fully developed app's source code (including activex controls etc...) on
a website and defined it on the GNU License that would be okay given MS'
license agreement with VB developers. Imagine tying in XML. Now thats a
powerful thought. Imagine open source code for law enforcement officers
laptops, vacations booking,...... The list goes on. Just again in order
to keep your bill down to 5 bucks I'll quit now.

Almost forgot whats important to you. How do you get paid? Developing features
and support and trainning and scaling the program and updating to VB7 and
rewritting to accomodate new/specific business practices and .... As your
own man. Based on a powerful paradigm <-there goes that ugly word again>
the 'open source' pppp...never mind. Get it?

Just Kiddin'
Spiker ;- )>
-Lets burn the DEVX Java editor in effigy for not responding powerfully to
valid Java criticism.- Hey eddy-tor whose your boss man? Your letting
us down here. We may need to ask for a replacement player.

"Todd B" <ToddB@NoSpam.AgendumSoftware.com> wrote:
>Mark, Like you I have been reading quite a bit about open source but to
>this day one question still nags at me. How the heck does anyone make
>money so they can pay the bills and buy food?
>
>Take Linux. There are a number of companies that now 'sell' it or at least
>they package it and sell the box which happens to include Linux. They
seem
>to also have some type of support contract they offer to companies and
>people that want to use Linux. Ok that is fine.. but you can only have
so
>many of those type companies.
>
>Thus, what happens to every other programmer? Let's say every programmer
>moves to Linux development whether it be C, C++ or whatever. Everything
is
>open source. Company A create programming tools, company B creates
>programming tools and so on in every category. Obviously since it is open
>source, they release it free and open to the world. What I want to know
>is who pays for the time and other expenses for the 2 or 3 years of
>development? After releasing the 'product' for free, where do they garner
>revenue to stay in business?
>
>There can only be so many 'companies' that offer 'support' for open source
>and that make enough money from that to survive.
>
>Your thread just made me think of this issue again so I figured I would
put
>the question out there. Can anyone reasonably explain how open source can
>be beneficial in the type of economic world we have today? If we lived
in
>a world where money did not exist and everyone had what they needed without
>the need for income, then sure. But for the life of me, I cannot see at
all
>why there is such a big push to go open source.
>
>--
>
>Sincerely,
>
>Todd B
>
>Confusion say * What goes around, Keeps going!*
>
>
>"Mark Alexander Bertenshaw" <mark.bertenshaw@virgin.net> wrote in message
>news:394e1c2b$1@news.devx.com...
>>
>> G'day -
>>
>> I have a background in VB, but have recently been looking at Java. This
>has
>> led me to read about the concept of Open Source, copyleft et al. I hadn't
>> realised how much work had been done by some of these guys - it's quite
>incredible.
>> Unfortunately, it is being done by such a minority group. And a lot of
>these
>> people seem to have an unfortunate tendency to look down on certain
>groups.
>> For instance, in the otherwise enlightening "How To Become A Hacker"
>(http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/faqs/hacker-howto.html),
>> Eric S. Raymond has this to say:
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>

[Mark Alexander Bertenshaw]

Spiker -

>Mark's idea is bad only in one respect.....VB.... the language is proprietary
>to *Microsoft*....duh! He seemed to imply he was going to duplicate the
>language and not pay for it or get MS to agree.

Yeah, I know, I know. This was a "wouldn't it be nice if" type notion. Having
said that - at what point would a RAD Basic-type language with virtually
identical syntax become VB? What is the dividing line - the "uniqueness"?
I seem to remember that someone did a version of VB which ran on OS/2 about
5 years ago (whatever happened to that?).

>Try that with JAVA and see
>what McNeally does to your sorry *ss when you change a spec. I can't believe
>Mark got quoted by DEVX.

I did? My agent will be in contact with them ... <g>

>The truth is I wrote to the GNU site's FAQs guy
>many moons ago and asked if you could have an 'open source community' around
>VB and from a licensing point of view he saw no problem. That is if I posted
>a fully developed app's source code (including activex controls etc...)
on
>a website and defined it on the GNU License that would be okay given MS'
>license agreement with VB developers. Imagine tying in XML. Now thats
a
>powerful thought. Imagine open source code for law enforcement officers
>laptops, vacations booking,...... The list goes on. Just again in order
>to keep your bill down to 5 bucks I'll quit now.

I always have wondered who would enforce the GNU license. Has anyone ever
been prosecuted, or is it because programmers who would be motivated to do
Open Source wouldn't break the license on principle (there was something
about this in "Homesteading the Noosphere", I think).

>Almost forgot whats important to you. How do you get paid? Developing
features
>and support and trainning and scaling the program and updating to VB7 and
>rewritting to accomodate new/specific business practices and ....

With VStudio 7, it looks as if Microsoft wants to control the whole programming
operation from start to finish. However, hackers are notoriously anti-big,
and I can imagine that there would be principle who might not use VStudio7
on principle. And maybe they might want to use an independent VB clone <g>.

> As your
>own man. Based on a powerful paradigm <-there goes that ugly word again>
>the 'open source' pppp...never mind. Get it?
>
>Just Kiddin'
>Spiker ;- )>
>

>"Todd B" <ToddB@NoSpam.AgendumSoftware.com> wrote:
>>Mark, Like you I have been reading quite a bit about open source but
to
>>this day one question still nags at me. How the heck does anyone make
>>money so they can pay the bills and buy food?

Todd -

I always got the impression that this was meant to be a part-time thing -
a project for "fun" and personal fulfillment, rather than for immediate gain.
Also, remember that most of the people who work on the software will actually
be using it, thus making them more productive. I can see that this is a <big>
incentive. Imagine that instead of cursing Microsoft and wishing their firstborn
drowned when VB6.exe crashes for the nth time, you could actually go into
the source code and fix the **** bug yourself. This seems to be a brilliant
incentive. If I could do this, I would go out and learn C++ !!
The few people who actually make money out of Open Source are usually those
in distribution (such as RedHat and Caldera), people who write books, and
those who set themselves up as consultants. These are in the minority, and
would have to be people "recognised" as being one of the OS "Godz".

-------------------------
Mark Alexander Bertenshaw
Programmer/Analyst
Prime Response
Brentford
UK