ESRI university site licenses is a decent measure of their being
supportive of education. Educational site licenses was not at all
well-liked among the marketers in the company, who often fought the
program's expansion to other markets (like international, K-12). It was
always argued that there were strategic reasons for subsidizing
education (ArcView being the 'gateway drug' of GIS) but that didn't mesh
with the marketers' bottom-line vision.
ESRI also has been strongly supportive of the conservation movement,
giving resources (including cash!) to 1000s of conservation
organizations. (All the while happily selling licenses to the extractive
industries, of course. But it's business!)
All in all, chalk it up not to strategic thinking but cognitive dissonance.
On 12-04-09 3:25 PM, Puneet Kishor wrote:
On Apr 9, 2012, at 9:26 AM, Eric Wolf<[email protected]> wrote:
How open is Apple?
Not sure if the above is a rhetorical question, but my take is that Apple is
very open where they benefit from being open, and very closed where they
benefit from being closed. Everything I do is completely open, and everything I
do is on Apple's devices, using a lot of software that Apple has had some hand
in putting together or packaging or distributing.
Comparing ESRI to Apple (or Microsoft) is hard because of scale and mix of
product lines. ESRI is indeed very supportive of education, although I wouldn't
have used their university site licenses as indicative of that stance. Their
bread and butter is software licenses, and they will and should to whatever
they can to protect it.
--
Puneet Kishor
_______________________________________________
Geowanking mailing list
[email protected]
http://geowanking.org/mailman/listinfo/geowanking_geowanking.org
_______________________________________________
Geowanking mailing list
[email protected]
http://geowanking.org/mailman/listinfo/geowanking_geowanking.org
