If you have lost business because you decided to fund internal solutions, because there is a must develop locally you haven't kept money in the country. As a matter of fact you may very well have cost the company/enterprise/country more money.
Lost business? What? How did you leap to that conclusion?
Anyhow, I stand by my original statement. If you can't afford to buy existing apps you almost certainly cant afford to develop new ones. If your in a developing country and you do decide to go the open source route, you better damn well know how youre going to sustain the developmen process and where the economic growth will come from. Nobody writes OSS expecting to get rich on selling it.
It's apparent that this hasn't been a discussion, then. It's unfortunate that a FOSS user like yourself really doesn't seem to understand the implications of FOSS in the developing world - to the point where you border on insult with your simplicity.
There's nothing to gain from further conversation. Good day.
And if you continuously redistribute money so that everyone has an equal amount, then what's the point of having money in the first place? Better to just get rid of it, and use some other scheme to allocate goods and services.
Let me get this straight - based on what you said, the point of having money is to have more or less than other people?
If buying propietary software allows the more rapid exploitation of economic opportunity does it matter if you have to pay a millionare in redmond, or provo or frisco for it ? Which is more important ideology or economic advancement.
Simple. You pay the people WITHIN the country to do work on the software within the country - so the money stays WITHIN the country. Millionaires or not.
As far as 'ideology or economic advancement' question - why do you think that they must be mutually exclusive?
It appears that the problems you see and the problems that exist are mutually exclusive. Maybe I'm wrong. Then again, maybe you are.;-)
You speak of economic realities and technological merits - but again, these are not completely separate topics when dealing with FOSS. Synergy. This is why medical administration software in Africa is almost completely FOSS. It's part economic reality, part technological merit, and part 'damned good idea'. That ONE example shows how the digital divide can be decreased using FOSS
If you really take a broader view of things, you'll see that FOSS can play an important part in decreasing the digital divide - that it already is decreasing the digital divide - despite your thoughts on it.
Very idealistic ideas, and worthwhile. But you have not said that FOSS is *not* part of decreasing the Digital Divide... So I am left thinking that you must agree.
The other issues *are* important, and as someone involved with ICT I can tell you that these things are being looked at, and being addressed. And the budget for ICT can be enhanced by not sending money to millionaires in Redmond - wouldn't you agree?:-)
Really ? There is no initial cost ? This means you have a reservoir of people trained in using the particular OSS app in question?? Oh and lets not forget making certain you have a support base that can and will help you to make things work. No initial cost, you should market for microsoft.
Fair enough, I oversimplified. There's no noticeable change in cost of training - all things being equal, a company will spend the same amount training people to use new software whether it is FOSS or proprietary.
Decreases the digital divide ? What did you do swallow Al Gore's campaign briefing books ? If you can't afford a computer OSS isnt going to decress the digital divide.
Quite the charmer. Anyway, there are means to decreasing the digital divide - I suppose from your perspective, the digital divide is an academic discussion - in many parts of the world it is a real problem. FOSS (*NOT* OSS) can decrease the digital divide... the fact that many FOSS applications do not have the heavy hardware requirements that proprietary packages do means that less $$$ is spent on hardware. Of course, this means nothing if you consider that the digital divide is not real. But where I am typing this from, I can throw a rock in a random direction and have good odds of hitting a house where this discussion can't be read. Can you say the same?
No, FOSS isn't a cure all. I'm happy that you utilize FOSS, and I understand what you are saying. Yet, FOSS extends beyond the cost of the software - it makes things available to people who wouldn't be able to have them available. Again, try throwing that rock.
FOSS does make it easier, since there is no initial cost in many cases. When you can take the money you would spend on Mickeysoft Office and reinvest it into your company, that's a big deal. What's more, it decreases the digital divide - which is more real than most armchair discussions.
There's more money for a business to spend on software changes because there's less money spent on software.;-)
That's somewhat myopic. If the applications are free, then programmers can be hired to make changes if and when it is necessary. OpenOffice is not a great example of this - but consider something like GNU Enterprise.
Yes and No. You do make a valid point, and it's one that I personally hope is not what happens. You'll note that the TTLUG isn't sponsored by any organizations - nor is it planned to be. At least with FOSS, you get out what you put in.
Regarding the drugs - the proximity to Venezuala is really the issue for trafficking. If they really wanted to stop drug trafficking in T&T, they would close the Gulf of Paria.
The Quality of Life issue is subjective. Having returned 2 years ago, I've found it pretty good - and I prefer it. That said, not everyone would.
Trinidad and Tobago Electricity Commission - T&TEC - is hardly dependable.
There are NOT a whole lot of very wealthy people. 20% of the population control 80% of the money.
Many countries, as a matter of fact. Even Germany, from what I heard. Here we are on the internet, and we know so little about the world we can communicate across in a few microseconds.
Let's look at that differently. Consider recipes, another functional work.
Yes, the ingredients are the same, and maybe even the process for combining the ingredients is the same. But the way it is written affects the way it is read; the way it is read affects the way it is used - and therefore the way it is written affects the end product.
Looked at differently, look at books. How many books seem to have the same mechanics? The plot, the characters, and so on. Yet each book is different. Each author writes differently. And different readers like different authors.
DoD works on memorandums. The fact that FOSS is mentioned means that FOSS exists. Sorry. OSS. Why isn't FREE software mentioned in this memorandum; they mentioned the GPL?
Having done my time in code mines of a DoD contractor, I can tell you that:
(1) Now, as far as the DoD states, Open Source exists.
(2) It *instructs* people to seek legal council on the license; something which is normally done in DoD.
(3) It made a post on Slashdot.
Strangely, the DoD has been using FOSS for a while. Why a memo now?
Slashdot Mirror
Anonymous cowards too? :P
If you have lost business because you decided to fund internal solutions, because there is a must develop locally you haven't kept money in the country. As a matter of fact you may very well have cost the company/enterprise/country more money.
Lost business? What? How did you leap to that conclusion?
Anyhow, I stand by my original statement. If you can't afford to buy existing apps you almost certainly cant afford to develop new ones. If your in a developing country and you do decide to go the open source route, you better damn well know how youre going to sustain the developmen process and where the economic growth will come from. Nobody writes OSS expecting to get rich on selling it.
It's apparent that this hasn't been a discussion, then. It's unfortunate that a FOSS user like yourself really doesn't seem to understand the implications of FOSS in the developing world - to the point where you border on insult with your simplicity.
There's nothing to gain from further conversation. Good day.
And if you continuously redistribute money so that everyone has an equal amount, then what's the point of having money in the first place? Better to just get rid of it, and use some other scheme to allocate goods and services.
Let me get this straight - based on what you said, the point of having money is to have more or less than other people?
Forgive me. I don't think that makes sense.
If buying propietary software allows the more rapid exploitation of economic opportunity does it matter if you have to pay a millionare in redmond, or provo or frisco for it ? Which is more important ideology or economic advancement.
Simple. You pay the people WITHIN the country to do work on the software within the country - so the money stays WITHIN the country. Millionaires or not.
As far as 'ideology or economic advancement' question - why do you think that they must be mutually exclusive?
It appears that the problems you see and the problems that exist are mutually exclusive. Maybe I'm wrong. Then again, maybe you are. ;-)
You speak of economic realities and technological merits - but again, these are not completely separate topics when dealing with FOSS. Synergy. This is why medical administration software in Africa is almost completely FOSS. It's part economic reality, part technological merit, and part 'damned good idea'. That ONE example shows how the digital divide can be decreased using FOSS
If you really take a broader view of things, you'll see that FOSS can play an important part in decreasing the digital divide - that it already is decreasing the digital divide - despite your thoughts on it.
Facts don't lie.
Very idealistic ideas, and worthwhile. But you have not said that FOSS is *not* part of decreasing the Digital Divide... So I am left thinking that you must agree.
The other issues *are* important, and as someone involved with ICT I can tell you that these things are being looked at, and being addressed. And the budget for ICT can be enhanced by not sending money to millionaires in Redmond - wouldn't you agree? :-)
Everything affects everything.
Really ? There is no initial cost ? This means you have a reservoir of people trained in using the particular OSS app in question?? Oh and lets not forget making certain you have a support base that can and will help you to make things work. No initial cost, you should market for microsoft.
Fair enough, I oversimplified. There's no noticeable change in cost of training - all things being equal, a company will spend the same amount training people to use new software whether it is FOSS or proprietary.
Decreases the digital divide ? What did you do swallow Al Gore's campaign briefing books ? If you can't afford a computer OSS isnt going to decress the digital divide.
Quite the charmer. Anyway, there are means to decreasing the digital divide - I suppose from your perspective, the digital divide is an academic discussion - in many parts of the world it is a real problem. FOSS (*NOT* OSS) can decrease the digital divide... the fact that many FOSS applications do not have the heavy hardware requirements that proprietary packages do means that less $$$ is spent on hardware. Of course, this means nothing if you consider that the digital divide is not real. But where I am typing this from, I can throw a rock in a random direction and have good odds of hitting a house where this discussion can't be read. Can you say the same?
No, FOSS isn't a cure all. I'm happy that you utilize FOSS, and I understand what you are saying. Yet, FOSS extends beyond the cost of the software - it makes things available to people who wouldn't be able to have them available. Again, try throwing that rock.
Bingo! Well said.
FOSS does make it easier, since there is no initial cost in many cases. When you can take the money you would spend on Mickeysoft Office and reinvest it into your company, that's a big deal. What's more, it decreases the digital divide - which is more real than most armchair discussions.
There's more money for a business to spend on software changes because there's less money spent on software. ;-)
Those poor millionaires in Redmond...
And in this regard, there is no difference between FOSS and proprietary software. So what's your point? ;-)
Yeah, that was my point. The post I was responding to made it look more 50-50...
That's somewhat myopic. If the applications are free, then programmers can be hired to make changes if and when it is necessary. OpenOffice is not a great example of this - but consider something like GNU Enterprise.
Relevance of software is subjective.
FLOS Caribbean: Success, Part II. More fodder, perhaps.
Your comments are based on software rather than philosophy. I believe that the philosophy that allows the creation of the software is the true boon.
Yes and No. You do make a valid point, and it's one that I personally hope is not what happens.
You'll note that the TTLUG isn't sponsored by any organizations - nor is it planned to be.
At least with FOSS, you get out what you put in.
that 'Piracy' isn't the problem? Oh my...
Good to see someone else caught those lyrics.
Regarding the drugs - the proximity to Venezuala is really the issue for trafficking. If they really wanted to stop drug trafficking in T&T, they would close the Gulf of Paria.
The Quality of Life issue is subjective. Having returned 2 years ago, I've found it pretty good - and I prefer it. That said, not everyone would.
McDonalds left. You *have* been away for a while.
Perhaps you should come down and live in Trinidad and Tobago for a while... You may be able to understand a few things better. ;-)
Some corrections:
Trinidad and Tobago Electricity Commission - T&TEC - is hardly dependable.
There are NOT a whole lot of very wealthy people. 20% of the population control 80% of the money.
Perhaps you've been away too long.
That's a gross oversimplification, and perhaps an amusing troll. Economics extends beyond the United States.
Many countries, as a matter of fact. Even Germany, from what I heard. Here we are on the internet, and we know so little about the world we can communicate across in a few microseconds.
Maybe he's on IRC right now downloading some of his favourite tunes. :D
Let's look at that differently. Consider recipes, another functional work.
Yes, the ingredients are the same, and maybe even the process for combining the ingredients is the same. But the way it is written affects the way it is read; the way it is read affects the way it is used - and therefore the way it is written affects the end product.
Looked at differently, look at books. How many books seem to have the same mechanics? The plot, the characters, and so on. Yet each book is different. Each author writes differently. And different readers like different authors.
Counsel, counsel, counsel.
DoD works on memorandums. The fact that FOSS is mentioned means that FOSS exists. Sorry. OSS. Why isn't FREE software mentioned in this memorandum; they mentioned the GPL?
Having done my time in code mines of a DoD contractor, I can tell you that:
(1) Now, as far as the DoD states, Open Source exists.(2) It *instructs* people to seek legal council on the license; something which is normally done in DoD.
(3) It made a post on Slashdot.
Strangely, the DoD has been using FOSS for a while. Why a memo now?