Re: Free software companies and stock options

["Kiran" <geekazoid@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hey Harveer, Kiran J

----- Original Message -----
From: Harveer S <lambysingh@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <linux-india-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2000 3:11 PM
Subject: Re: [LIG] Free software companies and stock options


> >Harveer S wrote:
> >
> > > seem to benefit them instantly, or tangibly. Support is one of them.
If I
> > > were to go to a business establishment today, and try to sell them,
say a
> > > financial package on Linux, and tell them that I am not going to
charge you
> > > for the package, but for supporting it; then at most places I would be
> > > shown the door.  They would prefer to get pirated s/w, and get
somebody who
> > > has been "educated" in some neighborhood computer center to do the
things.
> > > Never mind about efficiency, or whatsoever...
> >
> At 01:53 PM 9/21/00 +0530, Kiran wrote:

> >Please rethink what you just said.
> >
> >A business established will not agree to use free software and pay the
> >person who maintains it, but will agree to use free (pirated) software
> >and pay the person who maintains it?
>
> Yes, just see the acceptability of Linux among the NOS segment given all
> the hype etc. about it.
> (Source : PCQ User's Choice Awards - Sep'2000 issue p136)
> While Win2k, being a relatively new entrant as managed to bag the top spot
> with NT as a second runner,  still Linux manages only 11% of the total
> installs of Win2K. IMO, the reason is not hard to see. Win 2K is easily
> available (pirated),

I don't think PCQ includes "pirated" copies to gather stats.  It must be the
licensed ones,

However, IMHO, Linux is not used by corporates in the Enterprises (yet, )
because
Managers/decision makers in these corporate firms are not techie guys.  They
are more bothered with risks that would be associated with the choice of a
particular solution , and to cover their ass, they need the one with the
lowest "risk".  Risk here applies to general up-time, effectiveness of the
solution, reliability. robustness, future compatibility and blah. A
"warranty" or a "contract" which makes the vendor accountable for losses due
to failure would help them pass the buck.  A free software however comes
without the "implicit assurance of merchantability/fitness " and the users
are to use it *at their own risk*.

No matter how effective or efficient the Free solution may be, this
statement puts the decision maker's head  on the chopping board lest the
solution mis-behaves.  So unless the free solution being considered is very
popular (popularised probably because the soln was the first
serious/effective one for the problem domain-- like apache) and used
elsewhere by corporates, and the decision maker is gutsy enough, decision
will usually go in favour of a commercial soln, which may be inferior.
Note that I have defined enterprise as being "not technically savvy" as is
largely the case. However,  there are techie corporates like google who have
a horde of in house linux gurus to maintain their 4,000 node linux
behemoths.

Since I am now contributing to this loooong thread, i might as well add some
more things i had thought of earlier, in this thread context,

Radha & folks,
No sane corporate willing to stay in business would pay for the development
of computer systems for its business and open source it.  Consider this, two
banks start off with some capital x.  Bank A payz for its bare bones banking
automation (which doesn't include internet banking/atm etc) and gets a
robust soln, and open sources it.  It has spent considerable capital on the
development efforts not only in terms of "money" but also in time, personell
etc.  Bank B walks in, downloads the open source soln,  ( :-) thinking of a
downlaodable banking solution made me lol) sets up shop in days, where as
bank A spent months or years in setting up shop.  Since B has capital left
to squander, due to the benevolence of A (and some proponents of commercial
fsw :) ) It invests in development of Intenet banking, ATM kiosks etc
(closed source mindit)  to offer better services at lower service charges
and costs (compared to A that is).  So which bank do u think would
succeed??? which would u keep ur money in??? which of the bank's stock would
rise???

Open source is great for operating systems, and scentific computing where
scientists/engineers can build over work already done elsewhere, which would
do good for humanity (like weather forecasting using Beowulfs etc).  They
dont have to reinvent the wheel and are techie enough to support their
systems themselves.  They dont have to bother about commercial competition
or "going down in buisiness" since they are funded by govts or a group of
companies.  Open source is also great for the university student/home
enthusiast/desktops but pleaaz not for business software.  I don't think
this thread should be strecthed further (gawd is this the longest running
thread or what?)

Regards
Kiran
(Not Jonnalagadda)