Re: FyRE, I'm Curious About You Too...
From: FyRE (FyRE_at_toktik.demon.ku.oc.x)
Date: 12/27/03
- Previous message: FyRE: "Re: Blake Stowell said Linux ABI is not infringing!"
- In reply to: Tony Lawrence: "Re: FyRE, I'm Curious About You Too..."
- Next in thread: Tony Lawrence: "Re: FyRE, I'm Curious About You Too..."
- Reply: Tony Lawrence: "Re: FyRE, I'm Curious About You Too..."
- Reply: Bob Meyers: "Re: FyRE, I'm Curious About You Too..."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2003 06:02:45 +0000
On Tue, 23 Dec 2003 11:52:26 +0000 (UTC), Tony Lawrence
<apl@shell01.TheWorld.com> wrote:
>FyRE <FyRE@toktik.demon.ku.oc.x> wrote:
>>That experience polarized my opinion of proprietary OS' so much that I
>>decided to make every effort to encourage the use of open source when
>
>In other words, you have a political opinion that open source is
>better for the world than closed source. I don't necessarily
>disagree, but that is an OPINION, and one that can be argued
>against on a number of points.
Please don't use the "p" word. There's enough effluent flowing from
Darl and his merry band without adding to it. I'd say my opinion has
been shaped by personal experience of the problems proprietory
software brings. Chaining yourself to a single vendor; having crucial
parts of your business held ransom by a single company is madness.
Time and again I've encountered companies paying absolutely ridiculous
amounts of money for pretty pedestrian, in some cases just plain bad
software for which better, open source alternatives exist. And I do
mean better. As an example, whilst working on part of a local council
project to bring home-learning to problem kids I discovered a company
developing a "group chat" system using java and a proprietory back-end
costing tens of thousands of pounds and requiring numerous Microsoft
servers to handle a few thousand clients (text only). The software was
slow and buggy. An obvious, and free alternative was simply to use IRC
on a closed network; which they implemented, costing them zero and
working far better than the java software.
>You certainly have a right to your opinion, just as we have rights to
>ours. MY opinion is that I do what the customer wants. If they
>want to dump SCO, I'll help them. If they want to keep it, I'll
>help with that. I do offer my own advice and opinion if asked,
>or even unasked if it seems appropriate given the situation, but
>I don't get up on a high horse and insist that it is my way or no way.
I don't insist upon OS software when it's not appropriate. I just
don't help with anything else. I certainly wouldn't help to install
and configure a SCO product, even if they wrote decent software. It's
a dead-end product, and I'd feel compelled to explain exactly why I
believe that (throwing in Darl's comedic press briefings would no
doubt add plenty of weight to my case). Hell, I'd even recommend MS
over SCO - they're probably even worse scum than SCO, but they do have
a future.
-- FyRE < "War: The way Americans learn geography" >
- Previous message: FyRE: "Re: Blake Stowell said Linux ABI is not infringing!"
- In reply to: Tony Lawrence: "Re: FyRE, I'm Curious About You Too..."
- Next in thread: Tony Lawrence: "Re: FyRE, I'm Curious About You Too..."
- Reply: Tony Lawrence: "Re: FyRE, I'm Curious About You Too..."
- Reply: Bob Meyers: "Re: FyRE, I'm Curious About You Too..."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|