__/ [ BearItAll ] on Thursday 11 January 2007 12:37 \__
> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>
>> __/ [ BearItAll ] on Thursday 11 January 2007 09:10 \__
>>
>>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>>
>>>> The open source patent war
>>>>
>>>> ,----[ Quote ]
>>>> | The problem for proprietary software companies is that free software
>>>> | pulls the rug from under traditional software models. By definition
>>>> | free software is collaborative. Numerous individuals, hardware
>>>> | companies and academic establishments contribute to the code that
>>>> | is contained in a Linux distribution, and all have a vested
>>>> | interest in its success. The customer gains because the software
>>>> | is free and tends to be more adventurous, versatile and secure.
>>>> | The only potential loser is the traditional software vendor.
>>>> `----
>>>>
>>>> http://www.itpro.co.uk/features/101743/the-open-source-patent-war.html
>>>
>>> They don't have to lose out at all. A lot of Linux applications have a
>>> commercial side too, OpenSource does not mean that you can not make a
>>> profit.
>>>
>>> If a product is good it will sell, how well it sells only depends on the
>>> audience your software is intended for. Ok, so it isn't very likly that
>>> you will make Bill's billions if you released a commercial shell, mind,
>>> thinking as I type, I suppose the potential is there if you really do
>>> come up with a winner.
>>
>> I think the key difference is that you can't /force/ the customer to but
>> something due to lockins. Many proprietary vendors (note: I don't say
>> "commericial", which can also be open source) hold their clients hostage.
>>
>
> I don't think all that many users will think of 'lock-in'. Being held
> hostage doesn't have to be all bad
>
> "Right gov until the ransome is paid you have to stay on this Exclusive
> Hawian island in this fabulous villa at no expense".
>
> Its all a matter of what you are locked in to.
>
> Apple lock-in is a price based problem, you buy the system and then if you
> want more you need to sell the kids in to sweeping chimneys.
> MS Win lockin is, well actually I don't think there is a lock in there
> unless you say that it's a lack of alternatives.
> Linux doesn't lock in, more likly in some respects it has lock-out.
>
> No I don't hold with vendors holding customers hostage. There is always the
> choice, it is only a matter of whether the alternatives are better. We must
> think that linux is better or we wouldn't be here, convincing others that
> there is an alternative that works without biting your wallet is all that
> is needed, but its no easy task.
Linux may /sometimes/ requite you to program converters based on the source
code, but also consider support. With proprietary software, support can
quickly become very poor because support is a monopoly. I have read some
appalling rants about Apple's support, for example. Let's see how CentOS
manages to keep customer or users when it delivers a bad distribution... Red
Hat paid the price when they abused some cusotmers in the past... MySQL are
getting some angry customers for similar reasons.
--
~~ Best regards
Welcome to standards-compliant Web browsing. http://www.spreadfirefox.com/
http://Schestowitz.com | RHAT GNU/Linux ¦ PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
run-level 5 Oct 18 14:45 last=S
http://iuron.com - help build a non-profit search engine
|
|