--- Chris Richardson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Greg, the cost of ownership of commercial verses Open Source is a
> poor
> comparision.  

Maybe. It could also be true that the cost of ownership for open source
is lower. That's nothing to complain about!

But this analogy is certainly interesting:

> But here is a comparision of Open Source as compared to
> commercial solutions as it might be compared to buying or renting a
> home.
> 
>   1) Commercial Offerrings are like renting at higher than mortgage
> rates.
> When you stop paying rent, they take the lodging away from you and
> all you
> have are rent receipts to show for it.  

Good point. Substitute "lease" for "license" and that's about it.

But my point wasn't to debate the merits of open source -- really.
Rather it was a methodological question: How do you establish the total
cost of ownership for an open source product? Better yet, what can be
done to reduce cost ownership? Some thoughts: 

+ utilize open standards
+ release stable versions on a periodic basis
+ don't force people to perform unnecessary maintenance tasks
+ documnt carefully, and make that documentation available with the
product
+ if possible, provide training opportunities
+ make it easy for knowledgeable users and developers to become
involved in the development process
+ remember the "principle of least surprise"

===
Gregory Woodhouse  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Metaphors be with you.


_______________________________________________
Hardhats-members mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members

Reply via email to