____/ Jim Richardson on Sunday 30 September 2007 03:34 : \____
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Sun, 30 Sep 2007 01:48:21 +0100,
> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> ____/ Jim Richardson on Saturday 29 September 2007 20:47 : \____
>>
>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>
>>> On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 15:21:01 +0100,
>>> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> ____/ Mark Kent on Saturday 29 September 2007 09:31 : \____
>>>>
>>>>> "Non scrivetemi" <nonscrivetemi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>>>>>> chrisv wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >> One of my best friends has been using Linspire for years, now.
>>>>>>> >> Works for him...
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >It does. But Apple OS X also works as a BSD. But it's not open source.
>>>>>>> >It's aggressive lock-in and restriction of choice. We're back were we
>>>>>>> >started -- another Windows.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> He's not locked in. He could switch tomorrow to another distro, if he
>>>>>>> wanted to.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's sorta like saying you're not locked into Windows because you can
>>>>>> switch to OSX/Linux/BSD.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Bad driving is bad driving even if it's not Micro$oft at the wheel.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I quite agree. I don't know if you saw my other posting, but I was
>>>>> highlighting that lock-in is about an exit barrier. That might be the
>>>>> cost of replacing packages you've already bought, or the cost of
>>>>> replacing hardware, or the cost of redoing work which is stuck in
>>>>> proprietary formats, or the cost of paying for tools to unpick those
>>>>> proprietary formats, and so on.
>>>>>
>>>>> The point being that there is always lock-in, it's a question of how
>>>>> large the exit barrier is.
>>>>
>>>> Linspire supports OOXML (translators). If that's not a lockin, I don't
>>>> know what is. It also enabled Microsoft to pretend that OOXML is supported
>>>> by other companies, which fills our world with even /more/ vendor lockin.
>>>> Let's not even go into Linspire's proprietary codecs...
>>>>
>>>
>>> So when there's an ooxml translator for OOorg, that means any Linux
>>> distro with OOorg is "locking in" their users?
>>
>> ODF is an international standard supported by a large variety of
>> office suites.
>>
>
> Total non-sequitur. How does supporting ooxml mean a distro is "locking
> in their users" When OOrg on the distro you use can support ooxml, does
> that mean you are locked it?
There are two ways to look at this:
1. A distro that supports OOXML (or proprietary codecs for that matter
inhibits it.
2. Support for OOXML has assisted attempts to make OOXML, which is
vendor dependent and patent-encumbered, more widespread.
--
~~ Best of wishes
Roy S. Schestowitz | INQredible Hacktivism
http://Schestowitz.com | Open Prospects | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
Tasks: 141 total, 2 running, 138 sleeping, 0 stopped, 1 zombie
http://iuron.com - knowledge engine, not a search engine
|
|
