Slashdot Mirror
Open Source Not That Open?
mstansberry writes "At the Open Source Business Conference last week, Microsoft's Shared Source mouthpiece Jason Matusow argued the point that open source isn't really open. He said you can't just go changing code on supported Linux offerings without paying extra to companies like Red Hat or Novell. So as Linux is commercialized, it becomes less open. While Matusow made good points during his presentation, many in the open source community are skeptical of the idea at best."
The argument is certainly flawed, but other than the basic premise, everything he says is true. And it's an important point.
/won't/ fix?
People tout the openness of Open Source by saying that you can go in and change anything. Imagine saying that to your manager, who then says, "Great. Let's get RedHat." Somewhere along the line, you have to make a tiny modification to support some odd piece of hardware, and suddenly your support contract is worth less than the paper it isn't printed on. What is he going to think of your Open Source when something essential breaks that you can't fix and Red Hat
Open is good. But you should use the right tool for the job. If that tool is Linux, you use Linux. If that tool is Windows, you use Windows. Where I work, we even have an old OS/2 machine running--why? Because it works and there is no need to fix it.
His entire argument is that if you make changes to the source code, Red Hat support won't debug your modifications for you as part of their basic support package.
Yep, it's yet more FUD. Lets face it, if I install hardware without Windows Certified drivers and my computer becomes unstable, will Microsoft support fix it for me?
"I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
Linux is like Darwinian evolution. The code base mutates and the stronger strains survive. Sometimes parts of version cross into another, analogous to natural selection on individual genes.
And how do you think the code base mutates? Hint: it's not random power glitches flipping bits on the disk...
(No, I don't exactly support the "Intelligent Design" movement either, it doesn't go far enough.)
Can't find examples of evolution? No matter, neither could Dawkins
Repeat after me: NOTHING a Microsoft employee who is authorized to talk to the media says is ANYTHING but a LIE!
These guys make Scooter Libby look like the soul of honesty.
Pointless to even discuss anything they say as if it had meaning. There's no more meaning to a Microsoft statement than one from George "We don't torture" Bush.
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
Seeing how both of your examples require outside intervention in order to be created or improve. Nice to see that ignorance and ineptitude isn't restricted to the supporters of intelligent design.
P.S. To all you Flying Spaghetti Monster posters, the horse is dead, flogging is no longer required. Pointing and laughing is still okay, but perhaps it's time to start using a TLA to encapsulate all the wittiness that has preceded your post.
Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?