Aaron J. Seigo wrote: > On Monday 29 July 2002 11:36, you wrote:
<snip> >>Free software will never get far, if there aren't any big name companies >>behind it. Being free is all and well, but organizations care about the >>support, after installation service and infrastructure. > > > Free software is not inherently anti-capitalist/corporatist. they are > pro-Freedom (as it pertains to software). that said, there is absolutely no > reason why one person/group can not approach it from the Freedom aspect while > another group approaches it from the Business Benefits standpoint. I agree with the first part above, but I don't think the "Freedom" part really sells well to large organizations. They care about licensing, support and of course that the software in question can get the job done. > as for big name companies for customer support, some are already playing. the > community needs to maintain those relationships, but we don't have to worry > so much about whether or not they will arrive anymore: they are here and > doing brisk business. Agreed, but lets keep them here. =) I, and others think Linux is at the cross-roads at this point in time. It's important to get to the next level - the end users desktop, by providing alternatives and/or the applications, users want and need. One has to convince large organizations that Linux can do what Redmond's software can, and at a cheaper TOC, with all the support that they previously would have had. >>to day work, I continually must use Cupertino's software and or >>Redmonds. Why? Because it's not being supported by the software >>companies that endusers depend on <ie> the Adobe's and Macromedia's of >>the world for one. This has to change. > > > there are two ways to change this: stop using proprietary formats (e.g. Flash) > and help development of Free alternatives (money, testing, documentation, > coding, promotion) I'm not so sure that attacking proprietary software specifically, is in Linux best interests right now, and quite frankly the pragmatist in me, doesn't see such software disappearing any time soon. Hopefully such software can be written for Linux. >>Apple is now even moving into Linux's stronghold of movie graphics. > > > Mac OSX lacks most of the traits that caused Linux to become the CGI > powerhouse it has. not to mention that with all the big houses having just > shifted to linux, they aren't going to be moving anywhere anytime soon. Actually, Apple is accomplishing this by buying the software companies that previously had ported their apps to Linux. Apple recently purchased Nothing Real's SHAKE and another company whose name I just can't think of, offhand. The big houses haven't really shifted to Linux on the desktop side, they've been using it in the render farm for some time, however the desktop side's battle will be won by the people whom can provide the support, release in release out. Anyway this is somewhat off topic for the subject at hand. =) > on the other hand, if blender and a few other projects can get their act > together, Linux be able to may encroach on the video editting world that Mac > is still dominant in. That's the point isn't it? Traditionally, the Open Source/Linux movement has been so fragmented, that no one seems to be able to "get their act together". That's why an organization like CLUE speaking as one voice for the majority of Linux users/companies is so important IMHO. <snip> >>Well that can change if CLUE gets going. Advocating free as opposed to >>the branding of the Linux name is an error IMHO. > > > agreed. CLUE should, at least in the early days, stick to the lowest common > denominator: the Linux brand. it can meld both Free software and Open Source > benefits/approaches to achieve this end, but should remain focussed on > promoting Linux. <nod> Absolutely. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
