[Linux-aus] Re: Utter tripe in CIO magazine
brent.wallis at gmail.com
Sat Apr 8 06:33:02 UTC 2006
First, could everyone stop posting how good LW was?
....it's bad enough I missed it... :-) ;-P
You know, I think Jon has made a comment here worth expanding on:
>"Fly? They don't need to do that. So what was his point?"
This CIO is letting someone else work out what is best for him.
His view of the world is a result of marketing and not fact.
He see no value in a bird that can't fly.
For this CIO:
Bird=Things that Fly cos that is what I read.
Bird=Things with feathers, that may or may not fly, that come in many
colours and shapes. Some swim, some do not.
Some run. Some eat meat, others eat flowers. Some are ugly, some are
breathtakingly beautiful. .etc...
FOSS is a different approach to IT development. It achieves results on it's
own merits. Open Source processes allow IT in business to
embrace change and more importantly, offers OPTIONS.
The article in CIO magazine basically says to me:
"I want the world to stand still for me. Everything must always remain the
same and everything must fit into my pattern."
.....in our industry, this thinking is a road to nowhere, a slow and painful
The MARKET will look after this dude. I don't think we need to do anything
beyond making a statement that is the equivalent of a
"shrug and titter". The MARKET will bang his head against a brick wall one
day because these sorts of statements have narrowed
his options. He will never look at FOSS with anything more than a cynics
Going to press with anything remotely negative plays into this sort of
There are many CIOs out there that look for things like this to bolster
their own arguments against.
Going for the jugular in the press will only re-enforce their rather narrow
A press release that says:
"Hey we acknowledge that there are a lot of you out there that think like
but can your company afford to be so close minded in an age where their
competitors have more
than likely reaped the benefits of FOSS?"
Turn the tables. Make a statement that basically talks to a level above this
The target audience for a response should be the Board.
Is it right that they have someone running their IT who will not look at the
Do they really think that their competitors will do the same? Is it good
business to allow a single
vendor to dictate what is "best" for them?
In other words, any response should concentrate on the fact that this sort
of "mono culture"
is very, VERY bad for business. If I was a shareholder of this company I
would sell....and tell my friends!
On 4/7/06, Jon maddog Hall <maddog at li.org> wrote:
> mbp at sourcefrog.net said:
> > [...] it takes a bit of effort for an albatross to get airborne.
> > However, when they do they become an aeronautical marvel. A bird that
> > capable of flying nearly 2000 kilometres in a single day.
> True, but he missed an important point, that of the fact that penguins can
> months or years at sea maturing and fishing, returning to land only to
> lay eggs and raise young.
> Fly? They don't need to do that. So what was his point? I think he had
> head stuck in the sand, like another bird that does not fly.
> Jon "maddog" Hall
> Executive Director Linux International(R)
> email: maddog at li.org 80 Amherst St.
> Voice: +1.603.672.4557 Amherst, N.H. 03031-3032 U.S.A.
> WWW: http://www.li.org
> Board Member: Uniforum Association, USENIX Association
> (R)Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds in several countries.
> (R)Linux International is a registered trademark in the USA used pursuant
> to a license from Linux Mark Institute, authorized licensor of Linus
> Torvalds, owner of the Linux trademark on a worldwide basis
> (R)UNIX is a registered trademark of The Open Group in the USA and other
> linux-aus mailing list
> linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the linux-aus