Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Open Source is 'Not Reliable or Dependable'

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the beg-to-differ dept.

Exter-C writes "News.com is reporting that Jonathan Murray, the vice president and chief technology officer of Microsoft Europe has made claims that 'some people want to use community-based software, and they get value out of sharing with other people in the community. Other people want the reliability and the dependability that comes from a commercial software model.'"

2 of 504 comments (clear)

  1. Where would you live? by DumbSwede · · Score: 5, Interesting

    So to make an analogy, I should prefer buildings that are built that allow no inspections while being built or even after construction is completed, to buildings that are free to be inspected. Which would you trust to live in?

    --
    Letter To Iran
  2. Re:SourceSafe vs CVS by 955301 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Just a few questions.

    First about "I tried to install CVS or subversion". So, which one was it?

    Second, you seem to value speed on something you do once - installation and setup - over the steady-state use of the source control tool - keeping your data integrity intact.

    For Subversion, the explorer client is TortoiseSVN.

    I've used Source Safe, Clear Case, Starteam, CVS and Subversion, RCCS, and a few others I've forgotten. By far, Subversion has been the best. Starteam was close, but it required a Microsoft setup back when I used it.

    I do not agree that Subversion is difficult to set up.

    --
    You are checking your backups, aren't you?