[Gllug] Discussion: Is Enterprise Linux a lock-in

[Mike Brodbelt]

On Tue, 2004-01-20 at 10:04, Richard Huxton wrote:
> On Tuesday 20 January 2004 09:04, Simon Morris wrote:
> > Read a good trade-rag yesterday with an article about Enterprise Linux and
> > I'd be interested to hear the lists comments.
> >
> > Some of the points raised in the article.
> >
> > 1. RMS suggested that "all the companies that distribute GNU\Linux also
> > distribute non-free software, which is unethical. Some even develop
> > non-free software which is worse"
> 
> If they thought it was unethical, they probably wouldn't do it. There is the 
> possibility that they disagree with RMS. He might even be wrong.

You can't say he's wrong. Ethics aren't absolute, and there is no right
or wrong answer. They may disagree with RMS. That doesn't make him wrong
(or right).

> > 2. There was a suggestion in the article that the large recruitment of OSS
> > developers by Linux vendors had drawbacks:
> >
> > "A drawback of direct commercial involvement [in Linux] is clear.
> > Developers who are based within corporations are unlikely to support a
> > project that is run by another competitor unless there is material benefit"
> 
> I don't do any work unless there is material benefit either (cash, enjoyment, 
> duty etc). In fact, no-one does.

There are also many instances of OSS developers starting new projects
rather than contributing to existing ones. An argument for commercial
involvement is that there are some programming tasks that people need to
be paid to do, as they're not fun....

Mike.

-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at gllug.org.uk
http://lists.gllug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug