Ok, have I got a really BIG beef with James Prendergast's comments in his Op Ed piece at FOX News. Here are his comments followed by mine
The policy promises to burden taxpayers with new costs and to disrupt how state agencies interact with citizens, businesses and organizations.
Let's begin with defining what OpenDocument is. OpenDocuments is an open standards based file format that is open to anyone to copy or work with. See OpenDocument FAQ for a more detailed outline. Here is just one quote from the FAQ OpenDocument is owned by OASIS, a not-for-profit organization dedicated to the open development of public XML standards. and here OpenDocument is royalty-free. It can be used without charge by anyone..
Now, since the file format is free, how does Mr. Prendergast's comment make this new file format to burden taxpayers with new costs? The latest version of Open Office version 1.1.5 allows one to download the office suite for free and open any OpenDocment at will!! How does that increase one's cost?
Worse, the policy represents an attack on market-based competition, which in turn will hurt innovation
As if market-based competition is the ONLY game in town? Riiigghhttt!! I don't think that Prendergast has ever heard about what Thomas Jefferson did with his Plow Moldboard of Least Resistance? He designed it and did NOT patent it. Was this what Jefferson was thinking when Predergast stated Massachusetts’ citizens and government agencies have been well served by a competitive, merit-based procurement process for technology services? So free fails to innovate? Riiiggghhhtt!!!
But for now, the policy simply promises enormous and unnecessary migration costs to Massachusetts’ taxpayers. The mandate forces the entire state government to acquire new technologies, train personnel, and contract for new services and support.
And you don't think that Microsoft's future Office 12 will force the entire state government to acquire new technologies, train personnel, and contract for new services and support?
I could go on, but this is too ridiculous to keep commenting on.
Thursday, September 29, 2005
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Please don't take offense at this, as none is intended.
From your comment on CIO.com's "Is Open Source Just As Good", you appear to list your affiliation as CompUSA.
Prendergast is the Exec Directory for A.T.L. CompUSA is apparently a "founding member" of the A.T.L.
How do you reconcile this apparent conflict?
Sure, I've worked for CompUSA, but I work for my customers and if they're interested in Open Office, and they are and what it offers, it is my job to take care of them so that we can stay in business. I sell both Microsoft and Open Source Software because it's right for the customer first, and CompUSA second. I give my customers the best solution for what they want to do that works for CompUSA. Two of my largest customers, Net30 Accounts not SMBs, use Windows, Mac, and Linux. If customers listen to A.T.L want MS products, then I will sell it to them. I reconcile this by taking care of my customers for repeat sales.
Actually, you should be asking the question: who wins when the truth comes out? The customer, CompUSA and A.T.L, or the sales person? Now, depending on your and others answers will show where the loyalty lies.
Personally I know I have to answer to a Higher Power for my actions and words, just as those around me and on this blog and in the end the Truth will be Told my Him and perfect actions will take place whether they be rewards or punishments in this life or in death.
Post a Comment