Well you sure have a point there! In fact I don't even know why this upsets me since I'm not even a client/user in that market! :) Maybe because I have the feeling that the free software I'm using can actually have more quality.. IMHO
Sorry, I think I came off a little hostile.
I do agree that there is some really high quality free software / open source software. I think that happens sometimes because much of that kind of software is a labor of love, instead of just profit. I know that I work really hard to polish my personal software projects because they are like my children.
Then again, I think some commercial software is higher quality than free software / open source software, too. My guess is it depends on how sexy the application is.
Sexy applications -- the ones that are fun to write -- tend to have high quality free software / open source software implementations.
It is the applications that aren't sexy that often see better commercial implementations, because not enough developers are interested in spending their free time to write free software / open source software that is not interesting to them.
Of course there are exceptions to those general observations as well.
But I do worry a bit when people think all software should be held to the same standard as, say, bridges or medical devices. Unless the software is critical (such as running a medical device, or handling security for a bank, or an OS kernel, etc.), then there is insufficient incentive to make it super reliable and robust. The market would punish you terribly for having less features and more cost.
There are limits to that, of course. If your application is a buggy mess, they'll reject it. It has to be "good enough", but often, "good enough" is still pretty buggy.