> The proposition is, that we should *NOT* worry about FOSS in the
> government _yet_ (or promoting it further via legislation) because as
> I've already stated, it's needless. We should prove to ourselves first
> that we can come up with quality software first before even thinking
> about making the government use the software "touted to be more
> stable, reliable, and more robust the current commercial software
> solutions".
> Of course. We can talk the talk, and keep talking the talk and not
> walk the walk. We advocate the use of FOSS in government and let's
> require government to use it -- but are we ourselves _producing_ the
> "quality FOSS" that government requires?
Although it's true that we miss out on "free as in speech" aspect of
FOSS by not contrbuting code or Philippine made FOSS, we still need to
start weaning ourselves off proprietary software.
Why pay for software that's cleary inferior? We advocate FOSS not just
for cost (free as in beer) considerations, but technical superiority
as well. Even if the gov't has to pay for any third party support,
FOSS is till more stable than proprietary solutions and therefor a
better investment.
It's kind of like food. If we don't try it first, we won't know how
good it is, we will never "cook" it ourselves.
We don't have to make the software that gov't requires if there are
already software out there that meets out requirements. Otherwise
Linux will only be used in Finland.
However, we should not miss the fact that we can contribute changes,
or customizations to FOSS to make it even better for our requirements.
--
Regards,
Danny Ching
_________________________________________________
Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List
[email protected] (#PLUG @ irc.free.net.ph)
Read the Guidelines: http://linux.org.ph/lists
Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph
