As opposed to purchasing software made up of millions of lines of codes, bits and pieces of which were outsourced to who knows where and full of pre compiled secret sauce binaries and a giant tangle of interdependent licensing agreements?

The way I see it, Its all about risk management.

Most companies don't have a problem with using off the shelf generic software - mainly because they can swap it out without seriously impacting their business.

But a western government spy agencies probably wont use Baido-GoldenCloudAllCom for their day to day note taking.

If software is a serious part of your business, you should have a team of people that know what they are doing looking after it for you. That team of people will have a much easier time of sorting things out when 'Shit goes bad' with an open/free stack that with a ton of sealed binaries and a priority support phone number.

If software is a just necessary expense (I just need word and email damit) then outsource the lot of it and keep it as a line item. This topic doesn't concern you.

1> You should be hiring expensive well trained windows admins in the first place. OTOH It is perfectly feasible that a company can hire el-cheap got a piece of paper linux admin that can balls up their infrastructure just like the el-cheapo windows ones.

2> Just because your using FOSS software does not force all your apps to become FOSS software. If its a niche application you wont be distributing it so who cares what if its glp, if its not and you want to make money selling apps then pay for the non GPL versions of what ever your using just like in windows land.

I think that if you looked closely and included *all* the ongoing support costs for the enterprisey things like sql server, oracle, sharepoint, SAP etc you start getting a massive savings boost. Admittedly this is all back end stuff, but that's were the big money is. (Mind you, at 50$ a year, 1000 machines almost gets you a full time employee)

I think you are being disingenuous as well by discounting the ongoing costs of licenses and support contracts. Those sorts of costs can hire you a lot of on site, first loyalty is to the company/department people.

I thought Libraries Of Congress was the imperial analogical measurement of information.

I want to know exactly how many L.O.C. can your brain retain in short term memory when moving between rooms?

What if the rooms you are moving between are within the Library of Congress itself?

I'm a contractor that has spent most of my career 'on site' at various large institutions. Never less than 2 years at any one spot - the contract has always been extended even after the original work has been done.

Very true, It you hire crap staff you will get crap results. Most of the places Ive worked had environments like this. In fact, its usually why I get called in ("ARGHH!! ITS ALL SHIIIIIIT FIX IT!!!!!!!")

Hang on. Your saying that an IT department that is not capable of hiring even basically competent staff is some how magically able to contract and evaluate a 3rd party to meet their businesses needs?

That's rubbish.

The same lack of management competency that led to hiring crap staff will result in a crap outsourcing project.

If you have a good management layer, you will succeed regardless of outsourcing or in sourcing. If you have a continual need for X number of developers, why pay the over head of a contracting firm? Sure bring in people when you need to, but they should support your in house team not replace them.

I say if your big enough for an IT Department, your big enough for at least one full time developer. If you want to outsource, then walk the walk and outsource THE LOT (Includes all CIO and IT related management positions)

How does outsourcing solve this? What if the outsourcing companies only developer gets hit by that bus, or even the whole company burns down? What happens when they decide that the custom thingy built for you is no longer worth supporting and there's no end of life code hand over (but there is a new wiz bang product that they sell!)

The big dollars required for outsourcing contracts that properly* cover all the problems you mention will most likely solve them for you anyway.

*As in actually account for them as apposed to 'well, they said they did, amazing considering the price'

3 years into a 3 month contracting stint and having witnessed at 50% turnaround of the permanent staff I disagree with the sentiment if not the letter of your point. There is always something else that needs doing and the long term position is a thing of the past.

If you business is small enough to warrant a single product only then I'm thinking that the requirements are small enough for something of the shelf. (Why outsource?)

If your business is big enough for a custom jobby (or 'configured' enterprisy solution) then its probably big enough to support one or two developers. If your budget cant support that then it sure as hell cant support getting into bed with a large outsourced 'solution'.

In my own experience it boils down the to quality and competency on the managers in charge. If someone cant manage productivity and deadlines with staff that directly reports to (and can be fired by) them, they wont be able to manage an outsourced company or project either.

you are kidding right? Have a look at the stats for the humble bundle releases some time. Linux users are more than willing to hand over the cash for pew pew's.

When you can get more than one person in a room to have a discussion that does not apply words like 'villain' or 'innocent' to either side (both having a long history of inflicting nasty deeds and suffering on the other).

They cant be charged with any crimes because technically they have not committed any. Any the apparent reason for the technically is that they managed to have the laws changed (GS repeal amongst others) due to intense lobbying and donations to BOTH parties.

That's were a lot of frustration is coming from. The massive inequalities between big corp and regular joe. Just because its lawful doesn't make it right.

I do not think this word means what you think it means.

The the product that you statement is based on, whilst very similar does not: Weigh the exactly the same, have exactly the same dimensions, have exactly the inputs or have exactly the same operating system as the ipad.

Instead of suing, apple should be using it to their advantage "Look at the crappy imitators, apple original is bestest!!1!"

No it wont. Remember the politicians promised to reduce spending, they even have a bipartisan committee and everything. In fact, I understand your guys are so committed to this that a certain ratings agency is being put through the wringer for suggesting otherwise..

my 2 time sucking rage building ribbon hates:

* Table editing in Design mode there is no font/alignment options. In Home mode you loose border color/size options. Moving into a table sometime shows different ribbon.

* Drawing Canvas: In Format mode, no font tools. In Home mode, no drawing tools.

Yes I can select text, hover and and wait for the floating toolbar to appear. Yes I can fill my title bar up with all the friken buttons I need. I DON'T CARE I WANT MY TOOL BARS BACK!

Seriously, why not offer a choice between ribbon and classic and make everyone happy? WHY WHY WHY WHY!

What? You first post derides 'free' software due to the need for and costs of the bevy of expensive consultants to come in and set things up for you - and then you point at Sharepoint as being the way of the future.

Are you seriously going to stand up hand over heart and say properly installing, configuring and using that beast is a point and click operation that can be undertaken by even the most average of it employee? If you are Ive got a several hundred thousand dollar, dual version install, unused cluster fuck that I can point to right now that says 'nope'

I bet you treefiddy million bucks that there are more dedicated sharepoint consultant firms out there than postgres shops. ... or did I just get trolled?

Nope. I hate HATE HATE the ribbon. I liked the tool bars because:
1) I could put them where I wanted (text formatting at the top, table stuff down the bottom)
2) I could easily customize or create my own specific tool bars
3) Toolbar's didn't appear/disappear depending on what the program thinks you are doing.
4) Using the drawing canvas was actually useful.

The Office tool bars give me serious RAGE when ever I have to use them at work. Ive actually installed libre office (against company policy) which I now use on the increasingly rare times I have to the document thing.

Didn't need a manual. but didn't know how to turn off the 'sent from my Ipad' auto signature. nice.

You are correct about the corporate world though. For anyone whose primary use of computers is consumption of information the use of tablets is a no brainer*. For anyone that actually has to create anything its keyboard and mouse all the way baby.

I reckon tablets are an awesome extension of pooting, (the Ipad is just to locked down for my likings, but I'm liking the direction android is going).

(*must.. resist.. urge.. to apply sentiment to management types... damn, failed)