Subject: Re: authentication systems (.NET, .GNU): Its the desktop, dummy.
From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" <turnbull@sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 16:33:52 +0900

>>>>> "Tom" == Tom Lord <lord@regexps.com> writes:

    Tom> The opposite presumption, that NO open source technology
    Tom> should be vendor specific, is the better idea.

But if your technology is not specific to you, there's no point in
developing it on speculation.  You must wait until the customers
demand it, and back their demand with contracts.  (Not necessarily in
full.)  This relegates FSBs to chasing taillights.  Yuck.

    Tom> A unique strength of open source businesses is the ability to
    Tom> cooperate on projects.

Er, um, what was that you said about your impression of Microsoft's
internal development strategy?  Sure, Microsoft is a single
corporation.  But isn't it plausible that a single corporation which
employs (I would guess) a couple orders of magnitude more developers
than the entire FSB sector is going to have internal divisions which
must cooperate on projects?  And it has the advantages of cathedral
coordination and the ability to ignore external standards processes
when it wants to go to market _now_?  That it will have more internal
cooperation than the whole FSB segment can possibly generate among its
members?

I hope you're right.  But I won't bet my livelihood on strategies
depending on more effective cooperation among FSBs than within large
corporations.



-- 
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 straight lines for?  "XEmacs rules."