Linked by Thom "Slakje" Holwerda on Sun 27th Jul 2003 19:04 UTC
Misinterpreted. I think that is about the best word around to describe the reactions to my previous article. Whether it has been misinterpreted due to people only reading what they want to read, due to an unclear choice of words on my behalf, or other factors, I am going to try it again. I will try to explain my position, again. Now, more stable, the code has been rewritten from scratch!
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
I would like to inform you that windows does NOT fall in the category of high-priced software (think Oracle).
The Consumer edition of windows sell for the price of 3 computer games, which is nothing to cry about.
If the main reason for choosing linux was the CD's price tag, it would be a bit silly.
I think you totally missed the point of the Open-source vs Microsoft debate.
In any large organisation, the price of software licenses is less than 10% of TCO. If some of them choose Linux instead, it's certainly not because of the per-unit license price.
The main reason some organisations reject Microsoft in favour of open-source is to get rid of the Microsoft lock-in and proprietary data file formats.
Other organisations reject it for political reasons (think City of Munich) and it's also OK. Why pay millions to a very arrogant foreign corporation when you can give them to locals with a competitive product and at the same time get rid of an annoying lock-in?
Please stop posting flame-bait articles on OSNews if you do not bring anything new to the table.