Actually, there is....

Free as in "I get my word processor for free, my OS for free, you get the source code for free, so it shouldn't cost me anything to have you modify it to do what I need". I have seen businesses say this.

I have also seen software companies look at free utilities, source files, and modules, only to find they can't use them because they would have to give away their own IP. The license takes away THEIR rights to THEIR software. Where is the freedom in that?

There is no business model in "free" software. Let's look at one of the most successful companies out there SELLING "FREE" software, RedHat. There really is no FREE in what they have.

And let's say I do have some application that doesn't do exactly what I want. It takes lots of my time to learn the code, the architecture, the, and maybe even the language it's written in. Doesn't appeal to me, and certainly in the realm of impossibility of most users.

Remember Whil Hentzen's manifesto a few years ago? Where he was going the free software route? Guess what...it didn't work. He's still doing VFP applications because free didn't pay the bills.

I told you to bring on your arguments. I can counter any of them because free simply doesn't work.

>Free software's advantages don't come from price alone. The word "free" there refers to liberty, free as in "free speech," not "free food." And there are no rational arguments against the advantages of obtaining source code and, under a copyleft license, being able to modify and redistribute the software to suit your needs.