Thread: Commercial Software. Evil?
View Single Post
tabletrat's Avatar
tabletrat is offline tabletrat
2008-04-11 , 19:38
Posts: 481 | Thanked: 65 times | Joined on Aug 2007 @ Westcountry, UK
#24
Originally Posted by Picklesworth View Post
Edit:
Should reply to the new posts here! I think a smart business is concerned about its customer's best interests. People like a company that is not run by robots, and do return when they feel they have been treated well.
Indeed. That is why microsoft never got anywhere. Oh.. hang on!

Originally Posted by Picklesworth View Post
Sorry, I am going to take a quick sidestep away from the real topic here...
I think a lot of you folks are jumping to an assumption that OSS is less capable software. Consider for a moment that Google and the US government (as well as numerous government agencies) rely on Linux servers. The French Paramilitary Police and the Swiss school system have recently adopted Ubuntu Linux on the desktop.
I was not considering quality at all in my original post, just the principles.
I prefer to use a BSD OS to run as a server, or even linux for a normal webserver rather than a windows one.
I am not a fan of linux on the desktop (and I feel it shows how one of the major strengths of open source is also one of its weaknesses) but I can see how it suits a number of people in certain circumstances (especially in a business environment)

Originally Posted by Picklesworth View Post
Knowledge of what one's computers are doing for the same reason people hate when cars are difficult to self-service.
Again, back to the car analogy from earlier, most people don't want to service their cars. I can see the advantage of choice, but when my car breaks I really don't want to fix it. Also considering that one of my cars is quite fast and powerful, it would present a considerable hazard to other road users if I did!

Originally Posted by Picklesworth View Post
It is also, actually, quite often better in some respects that are rarely met from closed software. A major open source project (like GNOME) has contributors from a huge variety of places and skills; not just what suits the leaders. The result is great internationalization and unsurpassed usability work.
Actually there is where I have an issue. For me, whereas I don't dispute the internationalisation issues, I find the great variety of places, skills and agendas makes a system that kills usability (for me) lacks any form of coherence or consistency and is very frustrating to use. Keys do one thing in one section, something else somewhere else, and it is completely confusing. My mother could not use any linux I have used. A large number of people I know couldn't use them either.

There is a lot of times where a 'design by committee' approach fails, and you need someone with a vision to ignore what everyone else wants and do what they think is right.

Originally Posted by Picklesworth View Post
Sometimes open source software is the best choice; being financially cheap is just icing. With that in mind, I think a lot of people think of open source the wrong way; it is not a death sentence. It is a feature!
I agree. Sometimes open source software is the best choice - I have no argument with you. However, it isn't always, and no utopia actually works.
What works is a combination of things, and where the open source model works really well for some things, it can work really badly for something else.