On July 16, 2002 01:46 pm, you wrote:
>
> Sorry for this rant, but stuff like this really makes me mad (and a little
> discouraged) and I figured people here could sympathize with me a bit :).
It makes me mad too, Bill. On the other hand, you have to sympathize with
governments, especially poor ones like Peru taking whatever is given to them.
Perhaps the real problem here is that the group of four (a.k.a. United Linux)
or Red Hat hadn't made the same offer *before* Microsoft could get in. I
haven't read enough on it yet, but I'm wondering if the deal locks out other
providers or is just a donation with no-strings attached (I know, seems
unlikely with M$).
It also appears that the Peruvian government wasn't behind the interest in
moving to Open Source, just one congressman, hence the apparent
contradiction. I'm guessing that political concerns weigh heavier here than
Microsoft's commitment. From what I read in another article, the president's
support is flagging. President Toledo needed a supplier for his government
project (which didn't have open source software in mind specifically) and
wanted a big name attached to it -- "Look at the big Americano corporation
that I got to throw us big bucks", etc. Politically, using open source would
be seen as more of a risky political move. Microsoft is doing more of the old
trick -- give the schools free software and equipment and then milk them for
the licensing fees later. Hopefully the government says "bye, bye, M$, thanks
for the gravy train" when the license fees kick in, and the gov't switches to
open source.
--
Jason Wallwork
"All snakes who wish to remain in Ireland will please raise their right
hands."
-- Saint Patrick
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
