Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

[News] Free Software Quality is Higher Than Generally Believed

  • Subject: [News] Free Software Quality is Higher Than Generally Believed
  • From: Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 26 May 2010 07:04:07 +0100
  • Followup-to: comp.os.linux.advocacy
  • Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
  • User-agent: KNode/4.4.2
Hash: SHA1

Don't Talk The Talk, Without Walking The Walk, Otherwise You Are Just Throwing Gasoline On Fire

,----[ Quote ]
| All of this because Neil said some 
| companies like Microsoft have us believe 
| there is no innovation with open source.  
| But there is no proof of that, so this 
| whole discussion goes off without a 
| foundation. Microsoft gets a probably 
| uncalled for black eye, the people reading 
| this are given a false impression and 
| worse of all, the many good deeds and good 
| will that Microsoft has earned from the 
| open source community recently is wasted 
| by misunderstanding.


Open source innovation on the cutting edge

,----[ Quote ]
| Open source doesn't innovate -- so goes 
| the old saw. Proprietary software vendors, 
| including Microsoft, would have you 
| believe the open source movement has 
| produced nothing but knockoffs of existing 
| products and cast-off code that couldn't 
| cut it in the free market.


7 open source innovations on the cutting edge

,----[ Quote ]
| Think open source doesnât innovate? Think 
| again. Here are seven projects that are 
| exploring exciting new directions in 
| computing -- for free


License Equals Software Quality?

,----[ Quote ]
| But does closed source software simply work 
| better? One could make the case that because 
| of the commercial nature of closed source, 
| i.e., finished projects make money, that 
| closed source software is ready to work 
| faster--though I don't think you could make 
| that a blanket statement. Like open source 
| software, a feature added to proprietary 
| software has to be decided upon, only now the 
| feature has to pass another bar to get 
| included: it has to be profitable. Which 
| means, even if it's the Coolest Feature Ever, 
| if may not get included because the 
| proprietary vendor may not want to make the 
| investment.
| This is why, ultimately, I think the whole 
| open vs. closed software quality argument is 
| moot. Each of the approaches has strengths 
| and weaknesses the other approach doesn't, 
| which balances out the notion that any 
| software will be higher or lower quality 
| because of its license. Developers code 
| software poorly or well based on their own 
| strengths.
| There are other facets of the open vs. closed 
| debate, a debate that I believe open source 
| ultimately wins. Just don't make software 
| quality part of the argument. It's a moot 
| point.



Linux users more experienced with windows.

,----[ Quote ]
| From what I understand, the most, if not the
| major, gripe windows users have with the
| Linux operating system is that it doesn't run
| windows programs. That sort of reasoning is
| about as powerful as a storm in a teacup.
| Linux is not a copy of windows and has it's
| own comprehensive suite of programs to
| accomplish all computing tasks.
| This means that when it comes down to a Linux
| verses windows debate Linux people have the
| advantage in knowledge and experience. I have
| never heard of any Linux user with a couple
| or more years of Linux experience moving over
| to the windows operating system. I have never
| heard of a windows user with as much
| experience in Linux as a Linux user has in
| windows.

Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index