Charity Shuns Open Source Code

brown-eyed slug writes, "The BBC has an article explaining Christian Aid's decision to use Microsoft software in preference to Linux. It re-opens the classic debate about the total cost of ownership, highlighting the wider availability of Microsoft skills, as well as the beneficial pricing policy of the Seattle giant. From the article: '...one of the things that we find is that Microsoft is viewed as the big, bad organization — but they've actually got some good corporate social responsibility. If you're a charity or an educational institution, you pay pence in the pound for the license, compared to what a major bank might pay.'" While the Christian Aid spokesman makes some good points, he seems to miss totally the idea of open code — confusing code with data.

Comments

Let us pray

[MECC]

Let us pray for these open-minded people whose software we are rue to use, that they may avoid eternal damnation for the path to hell is wide and 'open'. Let us be thankful we avoid damnation by avoiding their damn software.

re-opening the classic debate

[griffjon]

It re-opens the classic debate about the total cost of ownership

sczimme said: I must have missed something: when was this debate closed?

Oh man, you did NOT miss that thread!!! we resolved the TCO debate, Mac v Linux, Security models, and even Emacs vs Vi.

Re: A Good but goofy point

[IflyRC]

"that can actually cost more than having Windows on an enterprise machine" ... guy: it's when you have more than one machine that the benefits of free software get obvious. When you have more than a dozen, they're stunning.

Thats why I am an advocate of free hardware.

Revelations

[mordors9]

Doesn't it say something about many will be fooled by the Beast? Just further evidence of who Bill really is... (just kidding, lighten up)

woolley-jumpered amateurs

[daviducockny]

"one of the advantages of open-source - the core code can be examined by anyone - could actually work against the charity (...) the last thing you want to do is open up your systems to anybody to have a look at to deal with bugs" (...) "When you think of charities, we think they are liberal organisations with woolley-jumpered amateurs"

Well you sure proved wrong a misconception I never made.
*slaps suspenders*

Keep your pious paws off my code

[ignoramus]

Here's my inflammatory two cents:

I, for one, would rather see spammers using my free software than a religious org of any flavor (spammers, in my opinion, have a less detrimental effect on society in the long term and their forms of torture are at least tolerable... plus they've yet to start a war or blow stuff up).

I'd be much more tolerant if these charities weren't just public relations stunts--I mean, unless "Christian's Aid" is really to help some guy called Chris...