I am philosophically obliged to try to see the world as it is. Not as it should be, nor as others would have me see it. Unfortunately, this tends to lead one down a tangled and troubled path.
"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." Ghandi
Over the years I have observed a strange phenomenon which I call "Anderson's Theory of Software Paradox".
Simply stated it is "The Utility or Value of Software is inversely proportional to its Cost".
In other words, you tend to use and derive more benefit and utility (useful work) out of Shareware/Freeware "freebies" than out of expensive shrink-wrap packages. I see this rule especially apply to compilers for some reason.
When attempting to analyse why this is so, the best that I can come up with is that the "fat cats" are expensive, large, clumsy, parameter-ridden, bug-filled, poorly tested and inept at what they supposedly do. The "poor relatives" are lean and mean and designed to do the job simply and properly.
So I get twitchy when I see large pricetags on software.
There is a problem with "Free" Things. People hold them in contempt (or at least view them with suspicion).
Advertising has so degraded the word with "free" offers that people instinctively look for the catch.
But I feel strongly that Information about Y2K must be made freely available and attempts to "privatise" it should be countered.
I just have a different perspective.
Don't get me wrong. If I had all the answers I would be sitting on my yacht in the Bahamas, sipping a Mint Julep, and not slaving away over a hot keyboard to produce free articles like this.
"Anything worth doing is worth doing for money." -- Ferengi Rule of Acquisition #13