Re: Tax writeoff for Open Source Developers?

[Steve Cohen <stevecoh@mcs.com>]

Brett Glass wrote:

> At 06:21 AM 12/21/98 -0600, Steve Cohen wrote:
>
> >Unless you give us some idea of the project ideas your friend has been
> >forced to abandon and a rough idea of which were forced to be abandoned due
> >to practices of Microsoft vs. due to practices of the "loosely connected
> >group of individuals", it is impossible to evaluate your claims.
>
> His first love is compilers (as is mine). Microsoft effectively destroyed
> Borland's opportunities in the Windows market, while GCC killed off the rest.
> There's nothing left.
>
> Other projects he's hesitant to undertake (and probably won't) include
> various sorts of Internet software, a personal information manager, and
> grapics software.
>
> Microsoft and the GPL are acting as "pincers," he feels, cooperating to
> cut off his livelihood. He sees them as attacking from both sides to
> accomplish the same end: preventing him from starting a small but
> successful software company.
>
> And he's absolutely right.
>
> --Brett

I guess the reason I don't quite see things as you do is that I really don't
have an entrepreneurial bone in my body.  While most who meet me professionally
would say I'm a damned good programmer, that has never translated into the
killer idea that's going to make me rich.  Although, as I subject myself to the
many forms of mismanagement that could constiutute employment, sometimes I wish
I was on my own, but I've never taken the step.  If I ever do, my goal will be
to make a decent living and be happy in my work, not to become rich.  I see no
particular mystique in starting my own company.

With regard to compilers, it's certainly true that Microsoft has changed the
defininition of what we think of as a compiler, for the Windows market.  And
I agree, none could compete since that definition changes every year as the OS
engulfs more and more.  I fondly remember the days when "MSDN" came on one CD
and contained most of what a Windows programmer needed to know (except for a few
undocumented tricks, of course).  Now you get, what, 100 CDs.  GOOD LUCK finding
which one MIGHT have what you need.  I hope the DOJ does force the breakup of
Microsoft - then there might be a chance for someone to enter this market again.

As for GCC, I can't see the complaint.  If GCC isn't good enough, it ought to be
possible to market something better.  Why isn't it?  Or maybe GCC is good
enough.  Isn't Cygnus making money?

You say small but successful.  You know my favorite programming tools company?
Opus Software, makers of Opus Make.  It's two guys.  One wrote it, the other
markets it.  The guy takes personal pride in his product.  Call him with a bug
and it's likely you'll have a fix in your hands before the day is out.  It's a
niche and it's a good one.  I doubt he's getting rich, but if you ever struggled
with the crap make tools that Microsoft bundles into their compilers, you need
his product.  It saved my employer's ass one time.  That, to me, is a successful
software company.  I'd love to have a gig like that.  If that's not good enough
for your friend, I'm sorry but the right to be successful beyond one's wildest
dreams is NOT God-given.

As for the other stuff, it seems to me that there are opportunities in these
fields.  There may not be as many.  The world is changing.  As software becomes
commoditized, maybe we do need to think a little differently about how we make a
living.

I've never lived in the Silicon Valley.  The whole insane climate of venture
capitalists who don't know their rear end from a hole in the ground making
people rich overnight, "burn rate" and all that crap - who needs it, really?
All I want to do is be able to make a living writing good software.  I just
don't see how the GPL stands in my way of doing that.