On Thu, 9 Jun 2005, Jonathon Blake wrote:
It is such a small niche that microsoft has announced that they have
lost, and will continue to lose market share in the desktop, and
office suite, due to FLOSS products.
Uppsala University, for example, got a 90% discount on MS-Office. I'm not
sure
I am afraid chuck your thinking does not seem to take into account
generational change
as people who have been brought up with OSS move into positions of power.
There used to be a saying (I paraphrase)
You will always have a job if you buy IBM
not quite right but the sentiment is there.
That
And BIND is a niche product? BSD's TCP/IP?
There was a big hiss and roar about something called the OSI stack at one
stage. It was backed by all the major companies. TCP/IP got started first.
The big companies never got OSI off to any sort of start.
So much for a program's quality's
Wesley wrote:
And BIND is a niche product?
Ever tried to buy BIND, or equivalant at Frye's?
xan
jonathon
--
A Fork requires:
Seven systems with:
1+ GHz Processors
2+ GB RAM
0.25 TB Hard drive space
On Wed, 2005-06-08 at 12:43 -0400, Chuck wrote:
My point is that OSS will never be more than a small niche compared to
commercial software. Most people believe that a program's quality is
proportional to it's price. In their minds, free = piece of crap,
expensive equals great software with
Chuck wrote:
My point is that OSS will never be more than a small niche compared to
commercial software. Most people believe that a program's quality is
proportional to it's price. In their minds, free = piece of crap,
expensive equals great software with great support. I'm not saying this
is
Chuck wrote:
My point is that OSS will never be more than a small niche compared to
commercial software. Most people believe that a program's quality is
proportional to it's price. In their minds, free = piece of crap,
expensive equals great software with great support. I'm not saying this
is
That's why you can build your company on the support of free software.
And is NO
easy task, you need to have a lil army of experts around the clock. You just
dont have developers but you still have manteinance support, trainning, and
other services.
example, how many people actually pay for
Chuck wrote:
My point is that OSS will never be more than a small niche compared to
commercial software.
It is such a small niche that microsoft has announced that they have
lost, and will continue to lose market share in the desktop, and
office suite, due to FLOSS products.
free = piece of
OSS has already replaced a number of commercial elements. Firefox for
browsing, Thunderbird for email, OpenOffice for (guess what here) in my
business, Linux for a file server ( soon the desktop). I don't get your
commment. :-)
Cheers,
Alex Janssen
Chuck wrote:
Anthony Long wrote:
The article, and cetainly some replies, makes a mistake that many other
similar articles make: MS is not the alpha and omega of closed source so
the debate is not MS vs OpenSource, but MS vs both Closed and Open Source.
We get reminded of that every time MS gets caught using illegal methods
On Mon, 2005-06-06 at 14:53 -0400, Lars D. Noodn wrote:
The article, and cetainly some replies, makes a mistake that many other
similar articles make: MS is not the alpha and omega of closed source so
the debate is not MS vs OpenSource, but MS vs both Closed and Open Source.
We get reminded
I don't believe OSS will ever knock MS off either. It will be a viable
alternative to MS software. It may even be better. But it will never
replace MS software. There's too many corporate types that believe that
price and quality of software are directly proportional.
For the rich there will
On Mon, 2005-06-06 at 14:41 -0400, Chuck wrote:
Anthony Long wrote:
I'm curious to know what people think about this article?
http://hbsworkingknowledge.hbs.edu/item.jhtml?id=4834t=technology
Cheers,
Anthony
There are four things in life that are guaranteed...
1) You will
I did not say that OSS will never knock MS off. That is not the goal of
OSS, but as others including Linus Torvalds have pointed out it may well
be a side effect.
I did say that it is incorrect to frame the discussion as MS vs Open
Source. That's very inaccurate. If one must frame the
Agree with Lars.
There is a possible side effect that MS does die due to tactical errors
or the shear force of quality and competitive skill from financially
healthy FLOSS vendors.
The authors made a conspicuous mistake to suggest that installed base is
an advantage which creates its own network
Chuck [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
There's too many corporate types that believe that
price and quality of software are directly proportional.
FLOSS is not about price and quality. FLOSS is about freedom. So the
quote should probably read: There's too many corporate types that
believe that
17 matches
Mail list logo
