There are just so many things wrong here
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| tracyanne May 03, 2012 7:42 PM EDT |
For example.Quoting:Open Source Software and Business User's Perspective From a business user's perspective, although it seems to be cheaper to use Open Source at the start, what is often overlooked is the total cost of ownership (TCO). I have a small business, and I'm a small developer. I used to use Microsoft Visual Studio. The cheapest version of Visual Studio 2010 Professional (comes with an introductory MSDN subscription) is $499.00. The cheapest version of MS SQL Server is the "Standard" Version, which may or may not meet all my requirements, which costs $1,793, there may be an addition CAL of $209 per seat. 99% of the support I will need is free on the Web, Microsoft support will cost, but I don't know how much. Mono/MonoDevelop is included in the repositories of my Linux Desktop OS, and is free. My SQL comes with my Linux Desktop OS and it's Free. 99% of the support I will need is available free on the Web, and I can probably get the other 1% free if I cultivate the right people, but it's not likely to cost more than Microsoft's support. In addition i can get a more recent version of Mono/MonoDevelop by adding a PPA, or installing a parallel version in /opt. I have to wait until Microsoft decide I need some additional functionality before they will charge me another ~$500 With Mono/MonoDevelop and MySQL I can build all the web applications I can manage for next to no start up cost, and next to no support costs. I will, of course charge for my time, and any additional materials, the source code can be open source or owned by the entity that hired me. TCO of Microsoft products $ 499.00. $1,793.00 $ 209.00 ------------- $2501.00 + the cost of a Windows License $199.99 for Windows 7 Professional or (and I'd probably buy this version) $219.99 for Windows 7 Ultimate. so that's $2720.99 just to get started. Additional costs depends on what other products and Services I need to buy to get what i want out of Visual Studio and MS SQL Server and Windows OS TCO of Mono/MonoDevelop + MySQL $0 to get started + plus no greater addition costs, and in my experience a great deal less, than Microsoft's additional costs. From my experience, Versioning issues in both cases MS VS and Mono/MD are minimal. Note These are US Prices, the chances are, as Ridcully has already pointed out, they will be more expensive here. In addition to the above, I can help improve Mono/MonoDevelop, in multiple ways, including supplying patches for functionality I need/want. I can report bugs to Microsoft, and make suggestions for additional functionality, but unless lots of other people want what I want, i can forget about ever seeing that functionality. |
| chubinator May 03, 2012 7:59 PM EDT |
It seems clear to me the author knows little to nothing about Open Source and how it works. For one, he/she equates open source to free...nothing about open source requires free. Free or not, it's primarily about open standards and a community based, need driven approach to developing software rather than the standard monolithic, waterfall approach that leads to inflexible, proprietary solutions. And of course you have to pay for support! You would with commercial software too. What a nonsensical argument. And the assertion that its less secure!? Really!? I've really heard it all now. Has the author heard of Firefox or Chrome (based on the open source Chromium project). Would he/she really contend that Internet Explorer is more secure? That its a better product? Like the previous poster, I'm also a small business software developer and without open source, we would not have been able to achieve the results and the success we have achieved. Not to mention that our customers have benefited from using open technologies, expanding the pool of developers available to take the reigns long after we have left. Anyhow, I could go on--its flawed on so many levels. |
| tuxchick May 03, 2012 8:04 PM EDT |
Quoting:most innovations were produced by proprietary/closed innovation organizations... I bet the list of cool stuff suppressed by "proprietary/closed innovation organizations" is many times longer than what gets to see the light of day. |
| mbaehrlxer May 03, 2012 11:50 PM EDT |
more nonsense: Quoting:Some developer somewhere would copy someone else's code and paste code into an Open Source project where he or she infringes on that patent holder.this seems to be hinting at copyright violation ("someone else's code") but then mixes it up with patent violations, when the two have nothing to do with each other. a patent can be violated even if the developer writes code from scratch and doing so in proprietary software is no protection either. and copying someone else's code can be done in proprietary software too. and it doesn't need to be a violation if the license is honored and the copy is attributed properly. it can even be argued that in having the code public any such issues can be found earlier, before they become a real problem now, i have thought i heared it all and there are no new arguments, but Quoting:countries with large populations of idle developers will gain the advantage and put all the local talent out of work by offering free code for the taking. WAT???!!! greetings, eMBee. |
| Khamul May 04, 2012 3:05 AM EDT |
MySQL isn't comparable to SQL Server, and isn't trustworthy for really important data, since it's not Acid compliant:
http://www.wikivs.com/wiki/MySQL_vs_PostgreSQL
"PostgreSQL is fully ACID compliant.
MySQL's InnoDB engine IS NOT ACID compliant, due to a lack of consistency regarding internal rules (Foreign key cascades do not fire triggers,API's don't fire triggers)." If you want something comparable to a serious commercial database, you need to use PostgreSQL, which costs the same as MySQL (i.e., free). Why anyone ever wasted their time with MySQL, I have no idea; its main feature was speed (at the cost of reliability) which was useful for websites, but Postgres has caught up in speed. |
| tracyanne May 04, 2012 4:07 AM EDT |
@Khamul, ::shrug:: How can someone so smart consistently miss the point. |
| r_a_trip May 04, 2012 4:45 AM EDT |
WebNova seems like a funny little outfit. One thing is clear. The left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing. They also have a post extolling the virtues of Git: http://www.webnova.ca/Home/ViewPost/6669414313787834314 Last I looked (1 minute ago), Git was one of those dangerous, exploiting Open Source Softwares. I wonder why someone would rail against FOSS in the consulting business. They seem to be writing in house, custom solutions for their clients. FOSS should be an asset in that kind of business. |
| dinotrac May 04, 2012 7:26 AM EDT |
guys -- Innovation has never been the primary strength of free software. It really does excel at commodity items like operating systems, databases, web servers, development tools,etc. There are good reasons for that, including the fact that folks like IBM and others don't make their money selling operating systems, web servers, and development tools. If your real product is hardware systems and consulting services (like IBM), time and money spent ensuring that an operating system or web server works well with your products is a force multiplier. Innovation is a trickier thing because, frankly, it's a tricky thing for everybody -- we all tend to have a lot of the same great ideas. Really new stuff sneaks through, it seems, when we aren't looking. |
| jdixon May 04, 2012 11:51 AM EDT |
> The cheapest version of MS SQL Server is the "Standard" Version, which may or may not meet all my requirements, which costs $1,793, While I hate to play the devil's advocate in this case, that's not quite true. There is Microsoft SQL Server 2012 Express Edition, which is a free download. I'm sure it's a limited capability version, but it may meet many people's needs. |
| Fettoosh May 04, 2012 11:58 AM EDT |
I just sent a note to them saying " If that is how you think of FOSS, then you are not worth considering as an outsource. |
| gus3 May 04, 2012 12:59 PM EDT |
@Fettoosh, consider your hand shaken. Good on ya. |
| Khamul May 04, 2012 1:31 PM EDT |
@ta: My post was a tangent. I didn't miss the point. But thanks for the compliment! |
| tracyanne May 04, 2012 5:39 PM EDT |
Quoting:While I hate to play the devil's advocate in this case, that's not quite true. There is Microsoft SQL Server 2012 Express Edition, which is a free download. I'm sure it's a limited capability version, but it may meet many people's needs. I've tried it in a development environment. It's too limiting, I deliberately ignored it as an option. |
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!