On Thu, 2006-01-26 at 14:37 -0600, Greg Woodhouse wrote: [KSB] <...snip...>
> runs on a commercial OS. With regard to platforms: VistA runs under > InterSystems Cache' (a commercial M implementation) and GT.M (an open > source M implementation). Historically, it has run under DSM, OpenM, [KSB] Greg, that was a somewhat unfortunate choice of words, because your words imply that GT.M is not commercial. We are very much commercial! We have developers that need to be paid and lights that need to be kept on. Although both GT.M and Cache are commercial, an important difference is in the licensing. GT.M on x86 GNU/Linux, Alpha/AXP OpenVMS and Alpha/AXP Tru64 UNIX is offered as Free / open source software (FOSS) under the Gnu General Public License (GPL). The critical difference is in the business model. A business model based on the GPL means that while the software license is free, we must earn our revenue from the sale of services. A GPL based business model empowers the users, among other reasons, because it means that the vendor can never charge unreasonable support fees, cannot arbitrarily declare a product obsolete & require customers to replace it with another (more expensive) product, etc. Conversely, a GPL based business model also puts some responsibility on the user because although the software is free, the users who use it to generate revenue should support the vendor (for example, in our case, by purchasing support) so that the software stays current into the future. One of the myths that is part of the FUD spread by vendors whose business models are not based on open source licenses is that software based on open source licenses is not commercial. Please do not inadvertently help spread this myth. Thank you for your consideration. Regards -- Bhaskar Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/openhealth/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/