On Mon, 2005-28-11 at 09:42 +0800, Davyd Madeley wrote: > On Sun, Nov 27, 2005 at 06:26:05PM +0100, Quim Gil wrote: > > > In GNOME we donpt talk usually about first-party and second-party > > developers AFAIK (I have only heard of beer-parties). But we talsk about > > GNOME developers and GNOME hackers, in this context I find more > > appropriate Independent Software Developer and the acronym ISD (I agree > > that the proximity with the currently used ISV is a +1). > > In all of this discussion about whether they are third-party > developers or independant software developers, I think people have > missed the important point. > > That point is that we need to encourage traditional independant > software VENDORS to our platform. Our platform is placed in such a > way that vendors writing closed-source applications can use our > platform without licensing costs (unlike QT). > > Businesses require more than an email client and a web browser, they > require the highly vertical applications that enable them to carry > out their business. These may be as simple as inventory control or > as complex as an Australian law enabled, multi-client tax ledger. > > In the forseeable future, open-source developers are not going to > write these applications, because they do not have the expertise or > resources to develop applications of this magnitude. Thus, we need > to encourage traditional vendors onto our platform. Not at all! We need to encourage traditional vendors to become open-source developers. Andreas > > Once we have highly vertical applications available on our platform, > the rate of adoption of the desktop will increase. Perhaps this > doesn't fit into some people's utopian view of how the software > industry will be overhauled, but it is a much more realisitic and > achievable goal. > > --d > -- Andreas J. Guelzow Taliesin Software, Shelties, Pyr Sheps and Shetland Sheep
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part