[ Date Index ][
Thread Index ]
[ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
On Sat, Jul 05, 2003 at 08:40:47PM +0100, Rick Timmis wrote:In cases 1 and 2 above perhaps the further inclusion of some big IT Corps would aid the balance I have included HP and SUN
Corporate Software Development.
Companies such as IBM and Microsoft to name but a few have deployed much the independent user and corporate users alike. Developing new concepts
Bear in mind that Microsoft is not famous for innovating or "Developing new concepts".
and also building upon previous developments. This in many ways has improved the competitive ability of business and facilitated the growth of globalisation and world trade.
Be careful mentioning Microsoft and the word, "competitive". There are probably better examples.
The idea here is to convey the message that every business has different requirements. This is designed to lead the reader further into the concept that Software is a facilitator and that businesses thrive on having greater choice of facilitators
Business requirements for Software.
It is these unique requirements that have actively produced a development platform for software development.
I am not so sure about the "niche" "unique" argument. 99% of businesses are happy with Word. Tailored software for a particular business is a small part of the big picture.
Quality is an important word. I agree this should be included, perhaps coupled with adding value and choice. I have amended accordingly
Open Source Software development.
The Open Source community has developed huge quantities of Computer
I prefer quality. :)
Disagree we need to think of who we are potentially pitching to.
volunteers, some are professional software developers and some are gifted amateurs who wish to put their talents to good use. In more
gifted? scrap that. You do not need much "talent" to moan and report bugs.
Well spotted yep got that. Included $1 Billion invested by IBM
recent times coporate enterprise and business has also joined the ranks of the OSS community enhancing features and developing bespoke solutions to suit their requirements and then releasing this work back to the community for others to use and benefit from.
Examples?
Got that. Done
As a result of its voluntary nature the OSS community has little
As a result of business involvement? Scrap "as a result"?
Perhaps but we also need to be succinct as politicians have limited time. Hill House Hammond and Amazon as examples included
department, the head of which is Professor Stephen Hawking, uses a supercomputer which uses the Linux operating system which is a product of the Open Source community.
You need some more everyday examples. Like the web? Sounds scary when only clever people seem to use Linux.
Does not need definition, but see my earlier post for an example
* Discourage developers from working on OSS
How?
Previous discussions have covered this point in parlimentory discussion. This draft is designed to show balance on both sides as oppossed to appearing to be another rant from the OSS community, which has already happened far to often.
Conclusion.
Clearly corporate software developers need mechanisms by which they can protect there R&D investments and ensure that their is a level playing field in the market place. Equally the Open Source community must be
That does not make sense to me.
Clearly suggests you presented an argument why corporates need mechanisms to protect investment. I don't see the argument *why* they need to.
Level playing field when in competition with each other
Ensure a level playing field? Have I mis-understood? Companies get patents for "competitive advantage". Not "level playing fields".
Product A OSS software has xyz feature set and is Free. Coporate product B also has xyz but cost $500 per seat, unless product B can offer added value and features/benefits consumer will choose product A. Marketing and Spin not considered
their software and systems. Protecting the OSS community will ensure that corporate developers continue to develop software that offers added value that warrants the proprietory licenses and associated cost, and will ensure that global business has greater choice in selecting software appropriate to its requirements.
I don't understand how "Protecting the OSS community" will ensure proprietary software developers to continue doing their thing. That does not make sense to me.
Hmmm.. Sun has come out, -Kai
-- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG Mail majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxx with "unsubscribe list" in the message body to unsubscribe.
-- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG Mail majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxx with "unsubscribe list" in the message body to unsubscribe.