MESSAGE
| DATE | 2003-05-27 |
| FROM | From: "'Marco Scoffier'"
|
| SUBJECT | Re: [hangout] Big Business & World Perceptions - Linux on the Des ktop
|
On Tue, May 27, 2003 at 11:32:20PM +0100, Inker, Evan wrote:
> What you fail to understand and see is what the 'Corporate
> World' perceives and as I am not mistaken, I would have a much deeper and
> true view of what Corporate is as opposed to yourself and/or Michael and
> Ruben.
I full heartedly believe this. Which is why I think this discussion is
important. I personally don't have much desire to be in the corporate
world, but getting and keeping Free and Open Systems at every level of
society is very important to me. No matter what the corporate crazys are
thinking right now.
> As to MS Business practices and 'living in the gutter', let me
> just remind you that the IT Glut that has engulfed the US and World
> Economies has released MS, SUN, etc related IT professionals as well
> as Free Software professional back into the ranks of Unemployment so
> please don't infer that 'being better than Bill' makes one live in the
> squalor. That would be insulting my intelligence and yours.
Perhaps it is my angle, but I know of no Free Software Professionals
(except you if this is how you would like to be considered) who are
living comfortably right now. The guy who lives down stairs from me in
an apartment twice the size of mine, has the Microsoft particular
dopiness about things, but is making a fortune programming dotNet, and
not really knowing what he is doing. Anyway, that arguement goes
nowhere. Economy sucks. Everyone is hurting.
>
> "Microsoft has sold virus prone unstable junk for years marketed as
> the most innovative, and most 'must have' product ever to have
> existed."
>
> Granted. Marketing Hype and BS but very effective. I do not remember
> disagreeing on this point, do you?
Not disagreeing and not proposing a solution are different problems.
No one cant not compete against huge marketing sleaze. You must do it.
Think of the politician who does not believe in paying so much money for
television ads. Or that the whole system of collecting campaign money
is so sleazy and fraught major problems for a democaracy...
S/He cannot win.
S/He does not have to go to mud-slinging, but many political pundits
know that sometimes even that is required.
No politician would ever dwell on his/her difficiencies, or even
mention them, especially knowing that all the other candidates are
deficient also. That is what we are talking about, right?
Of course you snipped my most important quote. Saying Free Software is
not ready for the desktop is like saying a car is not ready for the open
road, or this huge shiny new SUV can't really go off-road. Or this
candidate can't really make her mind up herself but will follow the
orders of which ever group is shouting the most at that moment.
>
> What you fail to understand is that the Corporate World interacts with
> other corporate entities who are not using Free Software (at least not
> on the desktop In this scenario). Corporate Desktops must be able to
> open MS Word, Excel and PowerPoint Docs without losing format (mind
> you, Star Office has come the closest as per a recent article (as
> well as I have used it on MS OS and FreeBSD) but naturally, NYLXS
> wouldn't use or endorse it because it costs $$$ and is a proprietary
> version of OpenOffice)
Are you saying that StarOffice compatitbility is superior to OpenOffice?
I did not know this.
> and unless you can communicate with your clients in a format they can
> understand and have the ability to manipulate the data, you are
> screwed big time.
This is the open format issue which will _never_ be solved, unless
compatibility and openness becomes a pre-occupation in the corporate
world. Choosing to operate on a closed format for compatibility is
enslavement by definition. That's your data, and you are giving up
access to it, by choosing to put it in a container of which you don't
own the key.
> In a small Mom & Pop office, it really makes no difference but in
> Corporate USA it makes all the difference. And please don't suggest
> plain text, HTML, or XML (In the future, Yes most definitely this will
> be the standard but not now..).
See Micorsoft proprietary XML...
> Lastly, the 'Cry of the Zealot' does more harm than good. Instead of
> telling potential/existing clients "I only will do your entire network
> with Free Software" as opposed to "let me show you how I can save you
> $$$ without sacrificing and re-working your current infrastructure
> (aka, if need be Free Software running on MS OS -or- slipping in a few
> Linux or BSD Servers to wow the client and leaving the desktop for the
> immediate future when you can convince,
Yes yes and yes. The point is: saying 'Free Software is not ready for the
desktop' is completely different than saying, 'In the first phase of
switching X corporate client over to a complete sustainable Free
Software/Open Standards solution, we decided not to switch the desktops
yet as the re-training costs would have been too much for now. We have
switched the servers and mainframes. We are working on the transition
on the desktops.'
This type of statement will make tons of smaller users 'mom and pops'
switch now, 'oh I can be ahead of the curve and I don't care if
spreadsheets included in my impress presentations are formatted just
right, because I never include spreadsheets and I don't use powerpoint.'
'Free Software is not ready for the desktop' is an advertisement for
Microsoft. Any one who hears it will say, 'oh, it looked great but I
guess I'll wait until it is ready.'
Quite frankly the compatibility and retraining details which are massive
impediments for the corporate desktop are non-issues for the vast
majority of users. And should be treated as such.
Hopefully you will grant me that,
--
Marco
____________________________
NYLXS: New Yorker Free Software Users Scene
Fair Use -
because it's either fair use or useless....
NYLXS is a trademark of NYLXS, Inc
|
|
