Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 19th Jun 2007 10:29 UTC, submitted by binarycrusader
Oracle and SUN Simon Phipps of Sun has responded to the recent criticism of Sun's openness, pointing out that even releasing information that they may already have costs a lot of money. "Jonathan asked me to look into this, to ensure we're pursuing an open path across all of Sun, not simply the software group. We take all input seriously, and we can't solve all problems for all parties, but we're committed to doing our best to faithfully engage with all the communities we serve, in the same spirit as the existing Open Source Ombudsman Scheme. With the support of my team and others in the community I'll try to build a new scheme that is fair and transparent."
Permalink for comment 248975
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: What is openness?
by phoehne on Tue 19th Jun 2007 17:36 UTC in reply to "RE: What is openness?"
phoehne
Member since:
2006-08-26

Someone like Sun has the market power to go to a Broadcom and say "sorry, can't use your RAID chips - you won't open the drivers. However, Intel will." In my personal experience the contrast has rarely been so stark as in your example. In many cases the performance is comparable but maybe the Broadcom chipset is a little cheaper. In some cases there is no real performance or cost difference, but rather what the engineers have been putting in there. It also encourages the selected vendor to continue opening their drivers. Nothing sucks worse than testing the waters with a competative, open-source product to find no market acceptance. I agree they should pick the "best" hardware but best is often viewed along many axis, which may include the degree to which the driver is open.

Reply Parent Score: 3