On Fri, 30 Nov 2007 13:22:31 -0000 "Greg Sabino Mullane" <greg@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > --> It provides a feel-good feeling knowing that a big company, > > after having paid XXX amount on it, the solution will not die in > > X number of years leaving the customer stranded. > > That's a valid concern. Not sure having a roadmap really correlates > with long-term existence, but it's a logical concern for companies. uh like SCO... you pay XXX and... well the "solution" die. I thought resilience to management idiocy, financial scandals etc... was actually a characteristic of mature OS projects. But yeah clear long-term plans are something to consider, but they don't look so related with money. > > 2. Accountability > > --> Community Owned/Control = no specific person to sue. (and we > > all know how enterprises are sue-happy > > --> The want a scapegoat. With Community, who's to be sued? > > (unless of course they buy from a company such as MySQL or > > EnterpriseDB, they can most certainly sue them for moolah) > No, they want someone to call when things go wrong, not someone to > sue or a scapegoat. Please don't perpetuate this urban myth. No > companies are suing Oracle and Microsoft because of their products, > and companies have no expectation of doing so. It might be nice if > they did, and some theorize it would lead to better and more secure > products, but the reality is that with software, you are on your > own. Any company telling you otherwise as a reason not to use open > source is lying. It would be curious to see it happening indeed. -- Ivan Sergio Borgonovo http://www.webthatworks.it ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
