On Fri, 30 Nov 2007 13:22:31 -0000
"Greg Sabino Mullane" <greg@turnstep.com> wrote:
> > --> It provides a feel-good feeling knowing that a big company,
> > after having paid XXX amount on it, the solution will not die in
> > X number of years leaving the customer stranded.
>
> That's a valid concern. Not sure having a roadmap really correlates
> with long-term existence, but it's a logical concern for companies.
uh like SCO... you pay XXX and... well the "solution" die.
I thought resilience to management idiocy, financial scandals etc...
was actually a characteristic of mature OS projects.
But yeah clear long-term plans are something to consider, but they
don't look so related with money.
> > 2. Accountability
> > --> Community Owned/Control = no specific person to sue. (and we
> > all know how enterprises are sue-happy
> > --> The want a scapegoat. With Community, who's to be sued?
> > (unless of course they buy from a company such as MySQL or
> > EnterpriseDB, they can most certainly sue them for moolah)
> No, they want someone to call when things go wrong, not someone to
> sue or a scapegoat. Please don't perpetuate this urban myth. No
> companies are suing Oracle and Microsoft because of their products,
> and companies have no expectation of doing so. It might be nice if
> they did, and some theorize it would lead to better and more secure
> products, but the reality is that with software, you are on your
> own. Any company telling you otherwise as a reason not to use open
> source is lying.
It would be curious to see it happening indeed.
--
Ivan Sergio Borgonovo
http://www.webthatworks.it
