[OSGeo-Discuss] RE: OS and proprietary
punk.kish at gmail.com
Sun Apr 27 16:03:41 PDT 2008
On 4/27/08, Arnulf Christl <arnulf.christl at wheregroup.com> wrote:
> >> My original sentiment still stands -- if you have the money, but don't
> >> have the skills, and don't need it "yesterday," it might be better in the
> >> long-term to fund an extension of a good OSS project than to take the
> >> easy way out and buy a COTS package.
> > Absolutely.
> It appears that Open Source is the next level in the evolution of business
> models. ..
Arnulf, is there an English version of that article available? I don't
have a reverse compiler for German, but would love to read it. ;-)
If not, could you give a summary that is more than "Open Source is the
next level in the evolution of business models" and less than onerous
for you to summarize. Many thanks.
> COTS translates into "commercial off the shelf" and I wonder why this term
> should be restricted to proprietary packages. The times when one had to
> manually compile a PostGIS, MapServer, GeoServer, gvSIG, Quantum GIS and
> so on, before one could use them are over. You can - and that is an extra
> advantage - but you don't have to.
> So my suggestion is to put COTS on the shelf of terminology that is
> compatible with Open Source.
Very good point. Obviously, I meant "proprietary," and frankly, I want
to see "proprietary" also co-exist with open source, though my
preference leans toward the latter. Nevertheless, yes, COTS could very
well be open source, and held to the same standards and expectation as
other COTS but proprietary solutions.
> Best regards,
>  http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Software
> Arnulf Christl
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
Puneet Kishor http://punkish.eidesis.org/
Nelson Institute for Environmental Studies http://www.nelson.wisc.edu/
Open Source Geospatial Foundation (OSGeo) http://www.osgeo.org/
More information about the Discuss