Doug,

>Well, thing is is that if you bet your entire business on 'free' software you really put yourself into a position where your business judgement can be called into question.

I couldn't disagree more. The cost of the software doesn't mean a thing. What matters is what kind of support you have for your software. Thousands of businesses use free software every day, like Apache as a web server (check out any recent study on Apache's share of the server market) or using Linux as a cheap print server (check out Cisco's testimonials on how they have implemented Linux in such a fashion). Are you questioning Cisco's "business judgement"? They are one of the most successful companies in the world...

>Don't misunderstand... I like the notion of paying little or nothing for world-class software but something tells me that even in this case you will end up getting what you paid for.

What exactly is the "something" that tells you? Could we have some specific examples? Don't get me wrong, the Open Source movement and idea of free software are two things that still have me reeling and trying to fully understand, but to dismiss free software as "you get what you pay for", i.e. that the products are worthless in the long run, is dangerously dismissive at best...

>Additionally, at least here in the US there are going to be cases where a company will be required by their insurance carrier or lawyers or ?? to not use such software. Too much risk and liability.

This is probably true. I would be curious, though, as to what risk and liability they are expecting? When is the last time Microsoft paid out any money because their operating systems or application crashed? They simply do not. In other words, you truly are on your own even with the "supported" solutions, unless you pay an ungodly amount in service contracts (not even sure MS offers such comprehensive coverage...)

For anyone who has used Linux for a while, ask them where they get their support. Odds are they find out all they need from internet sites and USENET news. I won't lie to you, Linux can be a demanding and arduous road, but I have always been able to find more help on Linux than when I have Win95 or NT questions, and the Linux help is all free.

>I guess the thing that 'threw' me was the notion that a client would want a robust system but was unwilling to pay for it.. I wouldn't take a client like that knowingly. I figure that they will want my best efforts and not want to pay me either. <g>

Not paying for software isn't the same as not paying for services. Clients don't expect services to be for free, but it is not unreasonable to expect the software for free. As any Open Source supporter might tell you, software isn't for making money, it is for being used to make money -- subtle difference (and probably not worded very well). But services are where most "free software" companies make their money. Packaging, support, and consulting are very viable business models in this day and age...

JoeK