[H]omer <spam@xxxxxxx> espoused:
> Verily I say unto thee, that Mark Kent spake thusly:
>> [H]omer <spam@xxxxxxx> espoused:
>>> Verily I say unto thee, that Roy Schestowitz spake thusly:
>>>> Report: Linux, open source greener than Windows
>>>>
>>>> ,----[ Quote ]
>>>> | A new report from the U.K. Office of Government Commerce about
>>>> | Open Source Software Trials in Government, has found that servers
>>>> | running Linux could combat the rising problem of e-waste because
>>>> | they last up to twice as long as machines running Windows.
>>>> `----
>>>>
>>>> http://searchopensource.techtarget.com/originalContent/0,289142,sid39_gci1246762,00.html?track=sy184
>>>> http://tinyurl.com/38cge3
>>>>
>>>> Let's not forget about the new and fascinating talks about Open
>>>> Source in the UK. We seem to be heading somewhere...
>>> There seems to be a very proactive drive towards less proprietary
>>> solutions in the UK. First the government offices, then extended civil
>>> services, then schools. Once schoolchildren are educated in a *nix
>>> environment (exposure) then the next generation will have more of a
>>> disposition towards it, and "Open" ideals. Gradually proprietary (home
>>> Desktop) software will become irrelevant, and even non-bespoke
>>> (shrink-wrapped) proprietary software for enterprise too.
>>>
>>> Of course there will always be a market for bespoke solutions, but
>>> more and more of those solutions will likely be Open Standard, Open
>>> Source, delivered by 2nd tier solutions providers, with specific
>>> implementations, rather than top-down proprietary solutions. It's more
>>> or less like that already, in the main.
>>>
>>
>> I completely agree with you, but, there's no particular reason why bespoke
>> solutions should be proprietary, is there? There is no significant
>> difference between getting bespoke development done where you own or
>> share the code, and the same thing where you do not, /except/ that in
>> the proprietary case, where you are over a barrel from the moment it has
>> been produced.
>>
>> So, I'd say that there is going to be significant growth in software
>> houses which specialise in make bespoke versions of free packages, and
>> supporting them, on a paid-for-work basis.
>
> I should have said "more of those ^bespoke^ solutions will likely be
> Open Standard, Open Source", just to be clear, that's exactly what I
> meant.
>
Actually, on re-reading, it seems fairly clear to me, so I've no idea
why I read it wrongly the last time.
--
| Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
| Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
| Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
|
|
