marc fleury wrote:
>
> well,
>
> sorry I am jumping late. Only today did I read it.
>
Aw c'mon - jump on board and give them a good slagging like everyone
else :). But seriously, I don't think you should let them off so
lightly.
He might as well argue that academic research and development shouldn't
be "encouraged" by governments because it isn't directly driven by
commercial interests and will be bad for future innovation. If funding
was available for projects like jboss on the grounds that it was for
the common good then I don't see why they can't function on a similar
basis to academia and contribute in a similar way.
The guy sounds like the trailer for some dodgy horror movie. He seems
to be talking about open source projects as a threat in the same way as
the defence industry talks about the threat to national security of
some bloke in the third world building a missile launcher in his back
yard. Pure FUD and little else. The article implies that there is no
way the two approaches can co-exist and that R&D will cease if you can
get anything for free, which is obviously crap.
Luke.
> While there is a lot of FUD, I do relate to some of the points made by MS
> guys.
> I do believe that even open source needs funding to grow and manage
> innovation :)
> I am in that spot right now and believe me it is a bitch to figure out :)
>
> Without proper "financing of research and innovation" it isn't as fast or
> powerful as proprietary funded models.
>
> There is a pragmatic solution we believe ;-)
>
> marc
>
--
Luke Taylor.
PGP Key ID: 0x57E9523C
