Andrew Ho <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > For some reason, it appears that a support.microsoft.com URL was > "censored" and did not reach Tim. Here it is again (repeated 3x): > > 1. > > 2. > > 3. >
Ah hah! The URLs have been mysteriously moved to the bottom of your message - see below. I had a quick look at the firt of thoose URLs and it is not immediately apparent what its relevance is, but I don't have time to read it right through. Can you give us some hints? Tim C > > On Mon, 23 Feb 2004, Andrew Ho wrote: > > > On Mon, 24 Feb 2004, Tim Churches wrote: > > ... > > > matter of pure practicality - in order to undertake really > complex > > > projects, you need a team of people who can immerse themselves in > the > > > project, > > ... > > > > Tim, > > There is no debate that people are needed. However, how the team > come > > together and operate are quite different between free and non-free > > projects. > > > > ... > > > > For example, both IBM and Microsoft are already open-source > software > > > > providers. > > > > > > Microsoft? > > > > Microsoft provides open-source software through Windows XP, for > example: > > > > > > ... > > > > There is no permanent division between "they" and "us". We are > all trying > > > > to solve real world problems. Alliances and relationships will > change over > > > > time. If Oracle employees know better how to deal with certain > tasks, then > > > > they should do that part of the project. > > > > > > Quite so, and that's why implementations of an open source > hospital > > > system may still costs a substantial slice of that $450 million, > because > > > those Oracle people generally don't work on a volunteer basis. > > > > Most of us do not work substantially on a volunteer (= not > financially > > compensated) basis either. > > > > This confusion between free/open-source methodology and > "volunteerism" is > > quite misleading and counter-productive. Unfortunately, many free > software > > developers are reluctant to refute this error. It is rather > difficult to > > expend effort insisting that you are not making a "donation" when > you > > contribute code to a free software project. > > > > Free/open-source solutions offer lower "Total Cost of Ownership" > _NOT_ > > because free software developers perform work for no pay. Instead, > free > > (as in speech) solutions are less costly because > > 1) less need for lawyers > > 2) better communication between developers and users > > 3) more code re-use > > 4) easier to support and maintain > > 5) potentially larger market penetration > > > > Best regards, > > > > Andrew > > --- > > Andrew P. Ho, M.D. > > OIO: Open Infrastructure for Outcomes > > www.TxOutcome.Org > > > http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=http://support.microso > ft.com:80/support/kb/articles/Q306/8/19.ASP > http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=http://support.microso > ft.com:80/support/kb/articles/Q306/8/19.ASP > http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=http://support.microso > ft.com:80/support/kb/articles/Q306/8/19.ASP > http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=http://support.microso > ft.com:80/support/kb/articles/Q306/8/19.ASP
