Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 10th Sep 2007 21:01 UTC
In the News It does not happen every day that news related to computer technology - news we report on every day - makes its way to the headline news programs and newspapers here in my home country, The Netherlands. So when it does, I am usually on the edge of my seat, simply because it offers an interesting glimpse into how 'normal' people perceive our little world. The last few days, however, that casual interest has made way for something else - tooth gnashing irritation.
Permalink for comment 270065
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
When else?
by zztaz on Mon 10th Sep 2007 22:48 UTC
Member since:

If compatibility is weak or fails, isn't that exactly the right time to give alternatives greater consideration?

Alternatives should always be considered before any change. Compatibility may well dictate the choice, but the choice must be examined, not assumed.

Change is inevitable. You can have frequent small changes or infrequent large changes. Microsoft and other commercial vendors tend towards the rare but large change model. It's not a Windows versus Linux issue; RHEL offers infrequent but larger changes, too.

The problem with that model is that the changes, when they do occur, may be large enough to make switching to an alternative worthwhile. More frequent releases may result in more work testing and managing the changes, but any single release is unlikely to motive a switch.

Open source facilitates, but does not require, the incremental release model. I believe that incremental development results in faster improvement, and that the improvement is worth the higher testing and management cost.

Reply Score: 4