Re: gEDA-user: A little puzzled about the purpose of gschem

[Andrzej <ndrwrdck@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 11:09 PM, al davis <ad252@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> If you look at free/open-source software as a product to be
> consumed, like you consume commercial products, you will
> probably be disappointed.

I disagree. While writing OSS has value in its own (as a method of
gaining experience and skills by the author, and perhaps leaving some
bits and pieces for someone to pick up later), primary motivation for
doing it should be the same as in case of CSS - making a useful
product. If that's not the case, then either OS methodology doesn't
work or it is executed incorrectly.

OSS has an interesting property - a "critical mass of functionality".
Once an OS program reaches the level at which it which it does
something useful for the users, both user and developer base start
growing exponentially. It takes a lot of time and work for the
original author to reach this level, though. And in a field as
competitive as EDA even that might not be enough.

The bottom line is - there is nothing wrong with recommending Ltspice
to users that need its functionality (especially that it is a very
good tool and we can't match its functionality yet). Making the users
aware of existence of Ngspice or Gnucap? Sure. Winning them over the
features - not yet.

Andrzej


_______________________________________________
geda-user mailing list
geda-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user