begin oe_protect.scr
B Gruff <bbgruff@xxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
> On Tuesday 16 January 2007 20:21 7 wrote:
>
>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>
>>> Microsoft and open source experts to brief House of Lords
>>>
>>> ,----[ Quote ]
>>> | During a briefing this week, Microsoft's representatives are expected
>>> | to be asked about steps it has taken to improve online security as
>>> | well as facing questions about Microsoft's co-operation with
>>> | competitors. Following Microsoft's briefing, Laurie and Cox will
>>> | give their views.
>>> `----
>>>
>>> http://www.cbronline.com
>> article_news.asp?guid=ED5D5CF0-471E-4468-9C8B-057D90A2C1A0
>>>
>>> Not the greatest of days for Microsoft at government. See next news
>>> item...
>>
>>
>> This is a democracy - they should also ask open source
>> companies for their views as well.
>
> ...and they are doing so:-)
>
> "The House of Lords' Science and Technology Committee will hear from
> Microsoft UK's national technology officer, Jerry Fishenden, as well as
> Matt Lambert, Microsoft government affairs director, while making the case
> for open source will be Linux kernel developer, Alan Cox, and Adam Laurie,
> director and chief security officer of The Bunker Secure Hosting"
>
> This is looking serious!
>
Very serious indeed. I don't think that the proprietary fud machine
will be able to work for much longer. I was in a meeting at work today
where a younger chap actually stated that Open Source was unreliable,
and when I said that this was FUD, he shifted subject very quickly, and
then declared that he'd not come to have an argument (why does he think
he's there at all?).
He also went on to say that he'd been involved in studies which had
showed that open-source was more expensive than proprietary. I told our
experience was a 10 times reduction in cost - was he interested? Nah...
He came across as a very frightened young man, to me.
--
| Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
"Survey says..."
-- Richard Dawson, weenie, on "Family Feud"
|
|
