On 16-Mar-07, at 5:48 PM, james mathew wrote:
In my opinion, the tools and platform
are irrelevant - the criterion is: is the code shared or not. If so,
it is foss, if not it is proprietary. Which means i would prefer a
government that commissions code in VB and shares it to a government
that does it in python and doesnt share it.
Abolutely misguided opinion.
you mean it is better to have closed source code using foss tools/
platform than open source code using non-foss tools?
The companies that bid for these contracts oppose the sharing for the
simple reason that they follow the proprietary profit model of write
once, sell many times and feel sharing will eat into their profits.
Please understand that paying once for a custom made software(of which
they will
have absolute control) is far better than giving huge amounts as
license fees to
propreitary companies.
what does this mean? if it means the govt has control of the code why
doesnt it share it?
Here all Govt./Aided
high schools use "Free Software",
could you elaborate on this? What free software do they use? Is the
syllabus available for perusal?
Please have a look link for some details.
http://www.rediff.com/money/2006/sep/02microsoft.htm
i dont see any details here. This is a six month old news item.
Surely there must me official notifications, history of the process
etc etc?
--
regards
Kenneth Gonsalves
Associate, NRC-FOSS
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://nrcfosshelpline.in/web/
--
http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
