On Monday 08 March 2010 19:27:36 Vivek Khurana wrote: > On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 5:07 PM, jtd <[email protected]> wrote: > >> You are mixing two disjoint sets. > > > > I am. But deliberately. Because FLOSS users are affected by > > M$isms all the while. Which is closely tied in to procurement > > policies. Also... > > > >> I am not talking of government > >> contracts. The OP was talking about the difficulties in adoption > >> of FOSS and lack of trained professionals, with special emphasis > >> on graphics/design processes. > > > > ...this thread is specifically about a WB ministry trying to use > > FLOSS. Not just a reply to Niyam's (excellent) more general > > response > > > >> To which I am proposing a solution that > >> make a software that cuts the learning time, instead of matching > >> the learning time and empower users to do more with FOSS when > >> compared with closed solution. > > > > At least as far as audio processing goes, the learning curve is > > just the same as other tools. You can do far more already. The > > problem is that the user has not learnt the principles of sound > > and video engineering but merely the ability to handle certain > > tools. Having once invested his time and money in learning one > > set of tools, he is most reluctant to do so again. This is the > > same with lets say a > > On one hand you are saying that the learning curve is deterrent o > switching and on other hand you are saying that learning curve is > not a problem.
No the learning curve is not a deterrent, as in learning linux tools is not more complicated than the doze tools. Both would take the same amount of time. But having invested in one tool a user will not invest his time in learning a second tool. How is that contradictory? Linux audio tools are not positioning themselves as a replacement for doze tools. They are far better due the availability of many additional capabilities. One would switch when one runs into the limitations of closed tools - like latency, inability to do complex batch processing, use complex custom filter sets etc. This is the same as pro hardware. Switching manufacturers is an involved process. > > <snip> > > >> As I quoted MySQL, Firefox and > >> Google chrome as examples of software that did more than closed > >> sourced solutions, had shorter learning curve, at the same time > >> proved to be more secure and stable than closed source > >> alternatives. > > > > I disagree in the sense that these were a limited specific subset > > of cases > > Limited specific subset which are present on every third desktop > and/or enterprise server in the world. > As usual the discussion is going into the signature FOSSCOMM loop. > I drops out of the thread :) > > regards > Vivek -- Rgds JTD _______________________________________________ network mailing list [email protected] http://lists.fosscom.in/listinfo.cgi/network-fosscom.in
