Re:.Net with Apache (Score 1)

Dear Hackus, "Open means I get the source" - So what? The only difference this makes is that the organisation needing the technology pays the "open" source "guru" instead of "Uncle Bill". "What that means is you get to wait for your security holes to appear with your OS and Microsoft gets to decide which ones it will fix". - No, that means (worst case) I can hold a corporate entity, just like the DOJ did, responsible for it's actions, while "That means I get too search for them and fix'em at my leisure 24 hours a day, 7 days a week 365 days a year along with every other person that owns a copy of Linux, and the defects are fixed for free" only suggests that you work for free (not). You cost the same as any support, just because "open" source is being utilised doesn't mean it's cheaper. And if you cock up all I get to do is sack you (great - what about my useless software?) or litigate against your tiny "can't pay so won't pay" limited liability company. "That means for you the ones Microsoft doesn't fix, means you get to only get them with the next OS upgrade, if you even know about them to begin with" - once again, if they don't, you have avenues, if you don't, zilch. "That means for me, while my competitors go Microsoft in the server room, I cut my costs way down on maintaining the security and integrity of my OS binaries" - once again, myth - I save no money, it just goes to someone else. "Which means for you, are soon out of a job because your place of employment on average spends 50% more on each and every PC it puts in the server room because it has to ship Redmond a tax on the OS, and can't afford to pay you health insurance benefits, paid vacations and bonuses for Xmas every year." - my employment conditions are way beside the point (Sysadmin (Win2k & Unix)/ DBA / infrastructure), but out of a job is out of the question - just so long as I continue to see both sides of the equation (unlike most of the so called "open source" community). The IP stack argument is irrelevant - if you were around when they were separate, you would have had to obtain one to get on the net, and you would have paid money if the need was great enough and you couldn't get one free (am I making sense now?), and I ditto the comment about bundling IE from the previous answer. "People are the important part of the equation now more than ever. People are what you pay for to manage information technology" - spend more years in IT and you will see that you always have and always will have to pay for the people, regardless of whether the source is free or not, and "Closed software deprives people of getting the most out of the money you pay people for when managing your IT infrastructure" - Not necessarily, because I may pay less for the people who have to manage it, the key being correct management of whatever resource. And woe betide the corporate body that has Linux on the desktop for it's SOE using today's interfaces (gnome kde ximian whatever) - you will pay the same to support it, whilst having to put up with continuous training and retraining due to lack of familiarity from the user community, now more transient and temporary than ever. To put it very simply - people pay for stuff that they want. For stuff they really want they will pay more. People charge what they can get away with, regardless of the IP of what's being sold. But I suspect you are once again not being honest enough, that there's a W2K partition on your PC and that you boot to it more often than you'll ever admit! Darius