[OSGeo-Discuss] open source desktop shootout

Christopher Schmidt crschmidt at crschmidt.net
Fri Apr 9 07:00:11 PDT 2010


On Fri, Apr 09, 2010 at 03:36:43PM +0200, Seven (aka Arnulf) wrote:
> 
> Christopher Schmidt wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 09, 2010 at 10:16:52AM +0200, Seven (aka Arnulf) wrote:
> >> Markus Neteler wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 6:50 AM, Cameron Shorter
> >>> <cameron.shorter at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> Percy,
> >>>> To start the ball rolling, I've created a wiki page for a desktop comparison
> >>>> here:
> >>>> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/GIS_Desktop_Comparison
> >>> Here a reasonable contribution, lead by Tom McConnell:
> >>>
> >>> "Matrix on OSGeo and COTS software functionality"
> >>> http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0Albk_XRkhVkzdGxyYk8tNEZvLUp1UTUzTFN5bjlLX2c&hl=en
> >>>
> >>> Best regards,
> >>> Markus
> >>>
> >> Here comes the prayer wheel again...
> >>
> >> What does "COTS" mean? "Ready-made products" [1]. Is that the opposite
> >> to Open Source software? No.
> > 
> > Did anyone say anything about it being an opposite? "OSGeo and COTS"
> > is one phrase -- there is no distrinction in the spreadsheet (although
> > there is a row stating whether the software is proprietary or not,
> > which is obviously distinct from COTS.)
> > 
> > I don't understand your complaint. What would you change about the
> > spreadsheet that causes you to make this point?
> 
> Did I complain? 

Your email reads very much like a complaint to me. In fact, as your only
reply was a complaint about terminology, with no obvious positive
feedback for the person who put a lot of work into a nice spreadsheet, I
would feel very discouraged personally on reading it -- doubly so since
it comes from someone whose opinion is obviously well-respected in the
OSGeo community. 

> Nothing wrong with the spread sheet. It is just the
> words we are used to. To me "Matrix on OSGeo and COTS software
> functionality" reads as "Comparing OSGeo software on one hand and COTS
> on the other". 

But that's not what the spreadsheet is, nor is that the only way to read
the sentence. 

Regards,
-- 
Christopher Schmidt
Web Developer



More information about the Discuss mailing list