On 10/21/05, Luc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > When evaluating the usefulness of FOSS systems, like any other software > system, at some point one must make a decision regarding how mature the > system needs to be in order to be judged appropriate for the task. (i.e. > Are you prepared to assume the role of a general contractor, responsible > for finding and managing all the various resources necessary to complete > the solution, or do you require a fully managed / turnkey solution?)
Here's the real problem hidden in the above: People don't usually decide what they want their software to do. Instead, they get the requirements for the 'planned' software by looking for software that *might* do what they want it to do, then comparing features. That's not the proper way to do things, but it certainly seems to be popular. And the corporations and the people who represent those corporations (through private interest or corporate) are more than happy to sell people something that may not be the best solution. One of the best things to do is to hire a programmer as a consultant on these things - someone whose integrity is without conflict of interest. That, of course, means anyone with a vested interest in selling someone a particular solution from a particular company should be ruled out. That means most people who wear letters of certification from corporations shouldn't be used (and if that doesn't start a Holy War (tm), nothing will). If I work for Bobosoft, and I have a Bobosoft certification, guess what I'm going to sell you as an idea? It's the same as used car sales. I won't sell you what's not on the car lot. People... must realize... that they are supposed to be more intelligent than their software. And maturity in a software development cycle is always relative to the specific user's needs - but, it's considered bad business in the proprietary world to say that out loud, which is strange - because that's the way it is taught in software engineering courses. > Propriety solutions tend to provide the later, but a FOSS solution may > provide you with both options. The production methods commonly used in > FOSS projects are relatively new, but seem to be here to stay even if in > evolved forms. Like a popular cultural movement, it benefits from the > sheer number of participants. I would encourage those who wish to > explore ways of rigorously evaluating the appropriateness of a FOSS > system for a particular task to refer to "Succeeding with Open Source" > (Bernard Golden), and "The Success of Open Source" (Steven Weber). I'll toss in here that any Software Engineering text supports proper software engineering - which is not to be confused with reading marketing brochures, hiring people who represent specific companies, and so on. It's not really proprietary versus FOSS as much as it is good marketing versus good engineering. I'm not saying that any FOSS product represents better engineering - but I am saying that most FOSS doesn't have a marketing department with a budget larger than your organization's cash flow for a year. -- Taran Rampersad Presently in: San Fernando, Trinidad [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.knowprose.com http://www.easylum.net http://www.digitaldivide.net/profile/Taran Coming on January 1st, 2006: http://www.OpenDepth.com "Criticize by creating." - Michelangelo ------------ ***GKD is solely supported by EDC, a Non-Profit Organization*** To post a message, send it to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. In the 1st line of the message type: subscribe gkd OR type: unsubscribe gkd Archives of previous GKD messages can be found at: <http://www.edc.org/GLG/gkd/>
