[brluglist] windows sucks
johnahebert at yahoo.com
Thu Apr 11 13:33:44 CDT 2002
--- Dustin Puryear <dpuryear at usa.net> wrote:
> At 07:21 PM 4/10/2002 -0700, you wrote:
> >--- Dustin Puryear <dpuryear at usa.net> wrote:
> > > To open up another avenue of discussion.. But
> can it
> > > also be said that more
> > > open source than commercial software is written
> > > self-trained or
> > > hobbyists programmers? Could this result in the
> > > average open source program
> > > being written poorly, or at least not with the
> > > rigor as commercial
> > > programs?
> >Sure, but nobody should expect the average open
> >software to work well "right out of the box",
> Why not? Why should businesses or even your average
> Joe B. Consumer want to
> use open source software if it isn't ready out of
> the box?
You misquoted me. I said "average open source
software". Check the number of projects in
freshmeat.net or sourceforge.net that are in version
alpha: _the majority of them_. Linux, Apache,
SendMail, Gnutella, etc, are not "average open source
Again, you are using a bad yardstick to compare
commercial and open source software.
> We need to
> remember that 99.9% of users aren't developers. So
> if we push open source
> software then we need to be ready to support users
> that use it.
I have an easy solution to that: I push open source
software I am able to support, i.e.; not beta OSS.
> >it is reasonable to expect commercial software to
> >well, since we pay $ for it. We usually test the
> >out of it before putting it in to a production
> >environment. Or, we rely on the reputation of a
> >specific OSS package.
> >Agreed, there are a lot of crappy OSS and OS
> >programmers out there, but all we can really do is
> >point fingers and jeer. Given enough
> >power|time, even crappy OSS can get better.
> >I don't think it is productive to measure OSS and
> >commercial software by the same yardsticks. But, I
> >don't know what the yardsticks are for OSS.
> I don't either. But I do think that some yardsticks
> can be used by both
> camps. Key measurements include reliability,
> consistency, usability!, and
No arguments here. The OSS needs to raise the level of
quality of the software that it claims is ready for
public use. But, because it _is_ OSS, it is by
definition available to the public. This is at the
center of our discussion I think.
> Regards, Dustin
> > > Perhaps we should take Microsoft out of the
> > > discussion and only include all
> > > other commercial software. It's too easy to
> > > Microsoft code, and they
> > > are certainly not the major supplier of [all]
> > > software. Let's consider open
> > > source vs. commercial-code-without-Microsoft to
> > > the conversation on
> > > track. And if someone brings up Microsoft I'll
> > > up Sendmail as a
> > > counter example.
> >Good enough.
> >John Hebert
> >Do You Yahoo!?
> >Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax
> >BRLUG - The Baton Rouge Linux User Group
> >Visit http://www.brlug.net for more information.
> >Send email to majordomo at brlug.net to change
> >your subscription information.
> Dustin Puryear <dpuryear at usa.net>
> UNIX and Network Consultant
> PGP Key available at http://www.us.pgp.net
> In the beginning the Universe was created.
> This has been widely regarded as a bad move. -
> Douglas Adams
> BRLUG - The Baton Rouge Linux User Group
> Visit http://www.brlug.net for more information.
> Send email to majordomo at brlug.net to change
> your subscription information.
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax
BRLUG - The Baton Rouge Linux User Group
Visit http://www.brlug.net for more information.
Send email to majordomo at brlug.net to change
your subscription information.
More information about the General