Re the "NOTE"; if the low quality of open source speaks for itself as you seem to believe, why have MS and numerous other software providers felt the necessity to make unprovoked defamitory statements about the safty and quality of open source software?
Having worked with quite a few open and closed source software products of various kinds I'd say that there are more important things than mere code quality. In my opinion documentation and support of the software are as important in saving raw man hours, and here's the rub. It is certainly my recent experiance that open source software is better supported and documented by it's developers (who do it to have pride in what they do, not for the pay cheque) in general than most propriatry products. Quite paradoxical really as most peoples fears of open source software are based upon their belief that this is what is lacking.
Slashdot Mirror
Re the "NOTE"; if the low quality of open source speaks for itself as you seem to believe, why have MS and numerous other software providers felt the necessity to make unprovoked defamitory statements about the safty and quality of open source software?
Having worked with quite a few open and closed source software products of various kinds I'd say that there are more important things than mere code quality. In my opinion documentation and support of the software are as important in saving raw man hours, and here's the rub. It is certainly my recent experiance that open source software is better supported and documented by it's developers (who do it to have pride in what they do, not for the pay cheque) in general than most propriatry products. Quite paradoxical really as most peoples fears of open source software are based upon their belief that this is what is lacking.