a little too glib
Posted Oct 18, 2006 6:33 UTC (Wed) by ekj
In reply to: a little too glib
Parent article: A Question of Choice (Linux Journal)
That's the gist of it. They want certain merits to count, and other merits to not count, you're free to choose, but you should ignore certain properties of the product you're buying when doing so.
Some things that can count:
- What software you use *now*. (since changing means training-costs.)
- The technical capabilities of the software today.
- What format your existing documents are stored in.
- Convenience should count.
On the other hand, principal, long-term issues should be ignored, putting any weigth whatsoever on such issues would harm your own choice. (or if not that, then atleast the wallets of proprietary software-companies)
- Single supplier or multiple competing supplier is *irrelevant*. (this is an area, apparently, where you don't need choice)
- Freedom to keep the software, but change your support-partner if you're dissatisfied with the performance is irrelevant.
- Possibility of making your own adaptions, or paying someone to make them for you is irrelevant. (for example, it's *irrelevant* for software bougth for primary schools if you can translate the software into the kids native tongue.)
- Being able to let all employees and/or students use the same software used at work or in school at home, at no extra cost, is a completely irrelevant advantage.
- Stimulating the local software-developers instead of being dependent on, and sending lots of money to, a single US megacorp is irrelevant.
- Open standards that can be read by any compliant software instead of proprietary undocumented standards is completely irrelevant. Even for those agencies that are required by *law* to be able to read all documents for a minimum of 100 years.
to post comments)