|| ||"Hyre, Max" <Max.Hyre-AT-cardiopulmonarycorp.com>|
|| ||Ratings are fine (Open Enterprise, 9 August 2005)|
|| ||Wed, 10 Aug 2005 10:38:49 -0400|
Dear Mr. McAllister:
In your column ``Does a Ratings Standard Make Sense for Open
Source?'' (9 Aug. '05,
A rating says to potential users: Watch out. Think
twice. Double check. Get the facts.
It warns off potential users in exactly the way a full and
accurate bug list does: not at all---rather the reverse. In
both cases, you /are/ getting the facts: a clear, honest
evaluation of the program, something impossible to find for
Users recognize and appreciate this: they know what they're
getting. They know most proprietary software has failings worse
(often far worse) than the most severe bug found in a Free
Software bug list.
But if promoting open source is the goal, is it really the
best message to lead with?
Yes. Free Software is competing by different rules, ones
fairer to the user. Its ``promotion'' is so much more than
advertising budgets and PR departments.
to post comments)