[Linux-aus] Chilling effect?
brendon.chase at zdnet.com.au
Tue Feb 24 13:06:02 UTC 2004
>Recently, a denizen of the PLUG mailing list asked the National
>Australia Bank why they don't support Mozilla. NAB's reply amounted to
>"because it's Open Source" and they have so far refused to explain how
>this has any bearing on their policy.
Interesting considering this:
They don't seem to mind open source, it might have more to do with the
demographics of their user base on Windows running IE. (like it or not)
>Yesterday, I had a discussion with a fellow FOSS advocate in which he
>related to me that three of his customers (one Government department
>and two over-$100M/a corporations) have recently said, point blank,
>that they now have a policy of no Open Source at all, and that such
>Open Source applications and/or operating systems as existed in the
>company were to be promptly replaced.
That's weird. I would have thought these types of organisations would judge
software on it's own merits rather than the licence it comes with.
Also a rip and replace scenario sounds expensive.
However, not knowing specifics it is hard to judge. Cost and scalability
might be the overwhelming factors in such organisations.
>Do any of you live on the other side of this question, and know of any
>specific reason why these organisations might be doing this?
I've heard "Poor documentation, little or no support, security, scaleablity"
among a few - mind you none of these factors are specific to FOSS. It has
more to do with perception.
More information about the linux-aus