Mozilla to Businesses: We're Not Interested (PC Mag)

Posted Jun 27, 2011 15:58 UTC (Mon) by nye (subscriber, #51576)
Parent article: Mozilla to Businesses: We're Not Interested (PC Mag)

"Enterprise has never been (and I'll argue, shouldn't be) a focus of ours"

Good for them; somebody had to say it.

Enterprisey people seem to suffer under the delusion that not only do they matter, but that their needs should be put in front of the vast majority of people; as a result, can anyone name 3 pieces of 'enterprise-grade' software that could at least be described as 'not that bad'? How about *one*?

Forcing widely used software to be gimped because of some faceless companys' draconian policies doesn't sound like good idea. I'm sure MS wish they weren't in that bind.

Mozilla to Businesses: We're Not Interested (PC Mag)

Posted Jun 28, 2011 9:36 UTC (Tue) by tialaramex (subscriber, #21167) [Link]

Red Hat Enterprise Linux seems rather better than "not that bad" to me.

Mozilla to Businesses: We're Not Interested (PC Mag)

Posted Jun 28, 2011 18:55 UTC (Tue) by k8to (guest, #15413) [Link]

I work on "enterprise" software that I will not name because it would verge on advertisement, but I can honestly say it's "not that bad". I wouldn't claim much better, so I think your point has some merit.

Mozilla to Businesses: We're Not Interested (PC Mag)

Posted Jul 2, 2011 11:31 UTC (Sat) by JanC_ (guest, #34940) [Link]

There is a huge difference between applications that are enterprise ready (without bragging about it) and applications that are marketed as "enterprise ready". :P

For example Apache seems to be quite enterprise ready to me (they innovate around a stable API and using a plugin-based system), and although there might be better web servers for certain workloads, it will do its job fairly well most of the time...