Subject: Re: Debian GNU/Linux project's model a good starting point for fsb
From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" <turnbull@sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 1999 08:46:59 +0900 (JST)

>>>>> "shapj" == shapj  <shapj@us.ibm.com> writes:

    >> I think you just don't have a coherent definition of "planned
    >> obsolescence."  First, "obsolete" implies that a better
    >> replacement is _on hand_, which your "definition" doesn't deal
    >> with at all.

    shapj> No it doesn't.

Depends on one's definition of "replace."  See below.  The only
exception I can think of is when the last customer hangs up her hat
for eternity, which is not relevant to any profitable business plan
(unless you're in her will).

    shapj> Obsolete means that the function served is
    shapj> either no longer necessary or is now better served by
    shapj> something else.  Once it has been checked out and budgeted
    shapj> and such, the availability of new and better software
    shapj> certainly causes the previous software to become obsolete
    shapj> from the perspective of that customer.  If, however, the
    shapj> customer ceases to need what the old software does it also
    shapj> becomes obsolete.

True.  Brock's "definition" doesn't deal with that, either, which is
why I elided that point in the first place.

    shapj> There are discontinuous changes in which old stuff becomes
    shapj> obsolete by virtue of replacement with a whole new way of
    shapj> doing things.

Please note the 14th word in your second paragraph.  The defense rests.


-- 
University of Tsukuba                Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN
Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences       Tel/fax: +81 (298) 53-5091
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
What are those two straight lines for?  "Free software rules."