[...] >> My original sentiment still stands -- if you have the money, but don't >> have the skills, and don't need it "yesterday," it might be better in the >> long-term to fund an extension of a good OSS project than to take the >> easy way out and buy a COTS package. >> > Absolutely.
It appears that Open Source is the next level in the evolution of business models[1]. It is not a revolution because there is nothing to go back to. Slowly a sentiment is growing in the suits that business with software must be different to business with hardware due to their inherent difference[2]. We are pushing this process forward with every line of code that we produce, with every aspect of the foundation that we create and we can nudge it a bit further by using terminology appropriate to this process. So watch out for the words we use. COTS translates into "commercial off the shelf" and I wonder why this term should be restricted to proprietary packages. The times when one had to manually compile a PostGIS, MapServer, GeoServer, gvSIG, Quantum GIS and so on, before one could use them are over. You can - and that is an extra advantage - but you don't have to. So my suggestion is to put COTS on the shelf of terminology that is compatible with Open Source. Best regards, Arnulf. [1] http://www.opensourcejahrbuch.de/portal/article_show?article=osjb2007-01-02-freyermuth.pdf [2] http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Software -- Arnulf Christl http://www.wheregroup.com _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
