In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Moshe Goldfarb.
<brick_n_straw@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote
on Tue, 1 Jul 2008 15:21:34 -0400
<1az8zi9d79qk6.xmuv4qa74aot.dlg@xxxxxxxxxx>:
> On Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:42:59 +0100, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> Why enterprise still cannot accept Linux.
>
> Because Windows has better applications, especially for the desktop.
> Then you can add in the fragmentation of Linux and you can also include the
> fact that the GPL scares the suits and their attorneys and there you have
> it.
>
Moshe is entirely correct here, though "better" in this
context might mean "more marketing money thrown at the
media in order to sell them". I'd be curious as to whether
Microsoft Word has any technical innovations, compared to
OpenOffice -- but suspect Joe Average wouldn't care, as
long as he can embed "standard" spreadsheets (standard =
'.xls' in this context; do we really expect him to read
ISO/IEC 26300:2006?).
And GPL does scare the suits, though in a more rational
world one would merely ensure that the source code
repository is properly policed, then exported.
Unfortunately, that tends to crimp everyone's style.
Therefore, Windows is the "better" solution, because everyone's
scared of the code. Can't be too careful nowadays, I guess.
--
#191, ewill3@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
/dev/signature: Resource temporarily unavailable
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **
|
|
