After takin' a swig o' grog, 7 belched out
this bit o' wisdom:
>> Microsoft couldn't keep up, and here's why (from the article)
> That to me summarizes the whole existence of Open Source and open operating
> systems like Linux. There is not enough closed source and commercial
> engineers to create and maintain something as big as Linux and the entirety
> of open source. Because it can NEVER be done through proprietory means, open
> source has stepped up to doing it properly the open source way.
Worse, their closed intellectual efforts get thrown away when the company
> The OSes of the past are a just mere toys compared to the open source OS
> like Linux. Linux is a vast powerhouse that can never be matched or
> monetized using out dated business models. There is no need either because
> where it actually turns into monetized units is
> in the peripheral services it provides such as software support, supported
> applications, embedded devices and web based services like google search
> and these tend to be worth far more than the OS itself.
A little fuzzy, but yeah, times are a-changing.
English literature's performing flea.
-- Sean O'Casey on P. G. Wodehouse