Maybe you didn't qualify your statement enough by saying "I don't
think there is any music software that's any good for free on the
internet", but that *has* to be the most ridiculous thing I've ever
heard.
Look at all the good, *free* (and not as in cost) software that the
Free Software Foundation puts out. Emacs, GCC, and probably more than
you could imagine. Let's see, Apache is free & run by most websites.
Let's see, sendmail is free, the software used to run this mailing
list is free, hmm. I wouldn't doubt that most of the software used to
run the net these days is free. Sure, some of it sucks, but there are
wonderful peices of software out there, for free, that people have
written not for their own gain, but for others. It is that attidute,
that you would do something *because you enjoy it* and because *other
people* will enjoy it, and not because you'll make some cash.
Just so you know, free software does not mean free as in cost, but
free as in it gives you freedom (like being able to modify &
redistribute the source) instead of taking it away (using something
that you can't learn about & change but have to pay other people to do
it for you). There's a lot more to it than that, as well. If you're
interested I can send you the GNU manifeto, it is interesting &
enlightening reading.
(soap box mode off)
--brett
On Thu, 13 February 1997, at 14:28:30, Chris Fahey wrote:
quoted 4 lines Look for a program called SAW (Software Audio Workshop or something).> Look for a program called SAW (Software Audio Workshop or something).
> It's a cheap sequencer... Actually, the full version is expensive.
>
> Come to think of it, there is nothing that's any good for free on the
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
quoted 1 line internet. Nearly everything that's free on the internet either sucks or> internet. Nearly everything that's free on the internet either sucks or
^^^^^^^^
quoted 1 line is useless without paying for a full version.> is useless without paying for a full version.