OK we seem to have a headline/content mismatch.
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| dinotrac Jul 05, 2005 7:14 AM EDT |
If you read the entire article instead of the bold-faced summary paragraph at the top, you will see that the article is actually about the way free software is changing the software business. The author does indeed speculate that, under some circumstances, free software could hamper some kinds of innovation by some people, but balances that with the fact that substantial innovation takes place in the form of people extending building blocks into new and useful software. Never mind that the circumstances under which he imagines a dampening effect on innovation actually affect someone who is not actually going to innovate, but merely add to the competitive pile... Besides, it was only one little piece of the story. |
| mdl Jul 05, 2005 7:24 AM EDT |
It all depends on how you define "innovation". If you define innovation as "embrace, extend, extinguish", then I can certainly understand how open source could hamper innovation for certain large monopolies. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend_and_extinguish |
| dinotrac Jul 05, 2005 8:31 AM EDT |
mdl -Quoting:If you define innovation as "embrace, extend, extinguish", then I can certainly understand how open source could hamper innovation for certain large monopolies. Well, I guess you've got a point there! ;0) |
| sbergman27 Jul 06, 2005 6:07 AM EDT |
OK. I guess I should fess up. When I see articles which have the word "Innovation" in the title, I don't read them. (But don't tell anyone I said that.) I have the same reaction to articles that start with the words "What" or "Why". ("What Open Source Needs To Do To Succeed", "Why Open Source Will Never Succeed", "Why My Opinion Is The Only One That Counts", "What A Pompous Ass I Am"^W^W^W^W^W^W,etc. ;-) |
| tuxchick Jul 06, 2005 10:28 AM EDT |
Why sbergman, are you implying that the folks who write these articles are not experienced, educated, and fully-informed? Are you implying that perhaps their motives are not to inform, but to merely spew wind and generate clicks? I'm shocked, shocked I tell you. And disillusioned, bewildered, and betrayed. I haven't felt this lost and alone since I discovered that Jesse Berst, Michael Miller, and other ZDNet personalities rarely write their own columns, but used uncredited junior editors and staffers. I wonder which is more satisfying: having a public forum to pontificate, or getting paid for it. I bet a lot of our more eminent gasbags would do it for free. |
| PaulFerris Jul 06, 2005 6:49 PM EDT |
Quoting: I bet a lot of our more eminent gasbags would do it for free. My best Curly voice here: "Hey! I resemble that!" |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!