Re: Free software companies and stock options

[Sudhakar Chandra <thaths@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Kiran proclaimed:
> 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".  

<snip>

Kiran,

This was the exact same argument that was used over here in the US about
3-4 years ago.  Add to this argument other "points" like 'Linux does not
come with support', 'Who will I get in touch with if something failes' and
'Open software is insecure'.

People like ESR launched a PR campaign (taking advantage of the press'
thirst for a David versus Goliath story) that educated the IT managers that
their concerns were more of a corporate inertia thing.  IT managers
discovered that comapnies like Linuxcare and others offered commercial
Linux support packages that they could subscribe to.

One very big thing with Open Source software is the fact that you get the
source code for the software you use. The availability of the source code
does not mean that you /have/ to hack the code.  It provides peace of
mind.  A commercial software company could go out of business taking down
its "Intellectual Property" (i.e. source code) with it.  If you invest in
software from such a company, you are tying yourself to the future of that
company.  With Open Source software, you can rest assured that even if the
company that made the software disappeared, you can simply hire a couple of
unwashed Linux hackers to maintain the code that is vital to your company.

> 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???

True.  But look at it this way, if Bank B added a much needed feature to
the code it got from Bank A, it (Bank B) has to share the modifications
with Bank A.

Thaths
-- 
"I tell you, the kid's a wonder. He organized all the lawsuits against
          me into one class action."  -- Homer J. Simpson
Sudhakar C13n    http://www.aunet.org/thaths/    Lead Indentured Slave