[KLUG Advocacy] Re: [KLUG Members] Small Linux? (fwd)

[advocacy@kalamazoolinux.org]

>>>Found something interesting, read it and see what you think.
>>>http://www.linuxjournal.com/article.php?sid=5818
>>Overall a pretty sound article,  my only question would be "Who is he 
>>argueing with?".  The majority of Open Source developers I communicate 
>>with are very aware that "the world" can't buy a new computer every six 
>>months or get a $500 PIII with oodles of RAM on the nearest street corner
>>when they do go to buy a new computer.  I'd be pretty comfortable in 
>>postulating (I haven't actually counted) that at least 50% of the GNOME, 
>>OpenLDAP, unixODBC, gASQL, etc... developers I've had 1:1 e-mails with 
>>live outside the USA,  and many in countries where the mentioned 
>>constraints apply.  
>He also makes a big deal about the cost of windows not being significant
>enough to make people switch to Linux / free software. 

Yes, which seems contradictory to me.  Linux needs to run on free/cheap
machines,  but can't beat windows because windows isn't that expensive.... I'm
scratching my head.  And "Windows" may not be that expensive,  but then buy
Office, a C compilter, some other application....  What Windows user just has
"Windows"?   Windows is alot more expensive than just it's initial sticker
price.  I remember paying $500 dollars to Borland as a college student for their
developement suite.  And that was with a student discount!  It hurt, alot.  But 
I didn't know I had any choice.    Then I discovered there was nothing even
resembling a database included.  I paid $200 for a real crappy SQL engine from a
company in Canada.  I suspect to someone in Iran, India, {insert african country
here} $149 (Windows) + $500 (Compiler) + $200 (Database) would be out of the
question.  Certainly for a college student.  Thats ~$800!!! And you haven't
purchased a computer to run it on!

And one thing people overlook is languages.  Linux is apparently very popular in
Iceland, or so I'm told by the one guy I talked to.  M$ wants to make money.  So
do they produce a version of Windows for the specific language/dialect a scant
few  Icelanders have used for thousands of years? No way!  But some guy took
GNOME and added 'Icelandic' via the internationaization layer.

There is an incredible political aspect to that scenario,  but just
pragmatically, it shows a very serious advantage of Open Source.
 
>In a lot of cases, that's absolute true.  I work in an MIS department,
>and my employer would buy any Windows OS and application software I
>needed for home and work both.  Cost makes ZERO significance to me when
>I choose an operating system and application software for my personal
>computer.  But I still run Linux as my servers AND as my desktop.  Why?
>Simply put:  I _CHOOSE_ to run Linux on my desktops, as well as my
>servers, because I believe Linux is a better product -- period.

Exactly.

>My point:  Cost is NOT the only factor that makes people choose to run
>Linux.  He seems to imply that Linux is doomed on the desktop because of
>the lack of cost incentive.  I disagree.

In the end I think cost has little impact on anyones choice.  If they wanted
Windows and couldn't pay for it, they'd steal it.