On Don, 2015-03-26 at 17:01 +0200, Andreas Kasenides wrote:> On 26/03/15 13:05, Bernd Petrovitsch wrote: > > On Mon, 2015-03-23 at 16:08 +0200, Andreas Kasenides wrote: > >> I am usually emotionally (at least) against of open-source projects > >> loosing their independence to large corporations. Possibly due to bad > > OX-AG is a "large corporation"? > > Did I miss something? > > > > Kind regards, > > Bernd > > I have no idea how large is OX-AG. That is not what I said anyway. AtWell, at least somewhat implicated IMHO.> least not what I meant.;-) Fair enough!> I was trying to emphasize large or larger commercial entities trying to > take advantage of the OSS community. > Which happened many times in the past.Yes, there were some not-so-promising "take overs" but there were also others. IMHO the larger the corporation is, the less are the chances for *long-term* benefits of the OSS/free software (mainly because: usually commercial success is driven and defined from marketing to sales[1] sown to the techies which are forced into "features" and "delivery dates" to achieve some "company defined goal" - and that is usually not "bug free", "safe", or the like. Free software/OSS just happens that *at least* half of it should come from the "working level" and that is - at least - much more - ahemm - "inconvenient" for sales people). Bernd [1]: Sorry, but some "pre-sales techies" which are not really involved in the technical realization afterwards are just an excuse for the sales department. -- "I dislike type abstraction if it has no real reason. And saving on typing is not a good reason - if your typing speed is the main issue when you're coding, you're doing something seriously wrong." - Linus Torvalds
Am 01.04.2015 um 13:04 schrieb Bernd Petrovitsch:> IMHO the larger the corporation is, the less are the chances for > *long-term* benefits of the OSS/free software (mainly because: usually > commercial success is driven and defined from marketing to sales[1] sown > to the techies which are forced into "features" and "delivery dates" to > achieve some "company defined goal" - and that is usually not "bug > free", "safe", or the like. Free software/OSS just happens that *at > least* half of it should come from the "working level" and that is - at > least - much more - ahemm - "inconvenient" for sales people)that is simple not true - if it would be true linux distributions would not include half baken and aplha quality sofwtare again and again in stable releases because "the market out there" the *possible* long-term benefits are more time to invest because a fixed income -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 181 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: <http://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/attachments/20150401/cf522561/attachment.sig>
On Mit, 2015-04-01 at 13:07 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:> Am 01.04.2015 um 13:04 schrieb Bernd Petrovitsch: > > IMHO the larger the corporation is, the less are the chances for > > *long-term* benefits of the OSS/free software (mainly because: usually > > commercial success is driven and defined from marketing to sales[1] sown > > to the techies which are forced into "features" and "delivery dates" to > > achieve some "company defined goal" - and that is usually not "bug > > free", "safe", or the like. Free software/OSS just happens that *at > > least* half of it should come from the "working level" and that is - at > > least - much more - ahemm - "inconvenient" for sales people)FWIW the context were large "old-school" corps (like Novell or Oracle) taking over free software companies.> that is simple not true - if it would be true linux distributions wouldDefine "true Linux distribution".> not include half baken and aplha quality sofwtare again and again in > stable releases because "the market out there"That's everywhere in the commercial world the problem with "delivery vs quality/known problems" and someone's decision to ship or not to ship - based in whatever feels appropriate. BTW typical Linux distributions package some else's software and (almost) everyone knows that (and do not blame the distro for shipping buggy software - is there actually any bug-free software?;-). And it depends on - the package (core package like kernel, gcc, perl, apache-http, ...) vs some exotic application (the n+1.th text editor, MUA, ...). - the bug in question - is that stuff unusable or happens the bug only if you do crazy creative stuff on files with 6+GB size or 1000k lines? And usually distros run bug tracking and (try to) get bugs fixed - in house or upstream.> the *possible* long-term benefits are more time to invest because a > fixed incomeIf the free software is the core business, it is not a problem (and these are not the companies in the discussion). Kind regards, BErnd -- "I dislike type abstraction if it has no real reason. And saving on typing is not a good reason - if your typing speed is the main issue when you're coding, you're doing something seriously wrong." - Linus Torvalds