
Permalink for comment 523977
RE[5]: Comment by avgalen
by phoudoin on Wed 27th Jun 2012 12:38 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by avgalen"
Member since:

I guess that why such stuff is available under a big alpha/preview/try_at_your_own_risk/author_will_take_no_responsibility_ whatever_the_consequences_nuclear_war_included disclaimer.

No promises.

Now read those long EULA of these so-called polished/finished closed software: surprise, they say exactly the same (but in a more lawyer terms)!

There is no warrant of software completeness, polishness or featureness. The only difference is that closed software won't say publicly what they *do* know is not working fine in their product.

Meanwhile, many open project will share publicly their progress, issues and shortcomings included.
They often pay the price of process transparency for that, people calling their product unfinished.

But the same people will call a product sold in a good looking box as finished because 1) the box looks fine 2) they never will recognize they bought a product not finished/polished as they through and 3) they can't know how much the product is finished or not, the development state being secret.

It's not a question of openess vs closed, it's a question of transparent vs secret.
Aka does ignorance is really bliss?

Reply Parent Score: 10