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

Choice

[nevillethedevil]

Let me start by saying I am in no means a MS fanboy......however.

I have always viewed open source about being free to make a choice. And as much as many people don't like it, one of those choices will be to use MS products. For us to shout "FREEDOM OF CHOICE" and then belittle someone for making a choice that we don't agree with, sounds very hypocritical and does nothing to help the Open movement.

Just my 2 cents worth.