"There's free software and then there’s open source," he suggested, noting that Microsoft gives away its software in developing countries. With open source software, on the other hand, "there is this thing called the GPL, which we disagree with." Open source, he said, creates a license "so that nobody can ever improve the software," he claimed, bemoaning the squandered opportunity for jobs and business. (Yes, Linux fans, we're aware of how distorted this definition is.) He went back to the analogy of pharmaceuticals: "I think if you invent drugs, you should be able to charge for them," he said, adding with a shrug: "That may seem radical."
Full article at Ars Technica.
We do just fine "improving our software"... Linux continues upward while Microsoft's latest blunder is an expensive one. It looks more like GPL is promoting the jobs and opportunities he speaks of tenfold, while a stagnant business model is slowly killing Microsoft. There is no intention nor desire to give up on free software from the members of the community... but Microsoft is feeling the pressure... they are slowly giving way to our model.
