Open source, closed source, and the value of code

William Prothero prothero at
Mon Feb 29 14:54:31 EST 2016

I also find it hard to appreciate the seriousness of the problem. Seems like much ado about very little.

> On Feb 29, 2016, at 11:45 AM, RM <richmondmathewson at> wrote:
> Whichever way one cuts things, the most widely used programming languages such as PASCAL and C++
> are as FREE as the air. As long as a language remains Unfree it is unlikely to be adopted widely.
> While Runtime Revolution / Livecode have, until comparatively recently, only had a closed source version of their programming environment, they have almost always had a "cheap way in" in the form of a lines-of-code-limited version, or a stacks-only-version; and had they not they wouldn't have got as far as they did before they released their open source version.
> At the moment I cannot entirely understand what the 'problem' is. There is a FREE version of Livecode
> which to all intents and purposes is a very large subset of an Unfree version.  The FREE version is so
> powerful that any "hobbyist" (a very, very fuzzy category if ever there was: a 'hobbyist' is a bit like the boy who buys a small box of Lego bits . . .) should be fully satisfied.
> Richmond.
> _______________________________________________
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode at
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:

More information about the use-livecode mailing list