[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
On Fri, 2003-04-18 at 12:00, AndrewWatt2000@aol.com wrote:
>
> > This is a straight slow pitch at the plate,
>
> In cricket the slower ball is a key part of the fast bowler's armoury.
Also true in baseball. But it depends on the surprise factor. The batter
only misses an easy hit if he expects nothing but difficult ones. The
metaphor breaks in the mailing list context because I had the time to
scratch my head and decide "yes, he really said that."
> <joke_for_brits_only>I thought Tony Blair was the guy who runs GNU Labour. :)
> </joke_for_brits_only>
>
What do you have against your countrymen to inflict that kind of pun on
them while letting the rest of the world off the hook?
> What I guess you are saying is that Richard Stallman could (or has) put
> forward a counter argument to the point I made and that you find his counter
> argument compelling.
>
One of his big arguments for using open source software is that if your
vendor/support geek goes away you can always get another. Not the case
with closed source. Obviously, the same applies to being held to ransom
by upgrades and support contracts.
The same argument applies to data. Having your data in a format that any
number of tools, supported by any number of people can work on is a
safety factor. The truth of that statement is independent of the
financial interest of the person making it.
It may also be a cost factor: certainly your vendor can no longer charge
'monopoly rents.'
It is also true that software vendors have had a reasonable expectation
of customer lock in, and may be forgiven for attempting to maintain that
lock in. The truth of that statement does not reduce the customer's
interest in getting unlocked. Again, nor does the financial interest of
the person making the statement.
> Richard Stallman may be less than entirely objective about matters like this.
> :)
Ahh, but the relevant question is "is he correct?" not "what are his
biases?"
Frank
|
