4 ms·

Based on some similar experiences with a corporate client: - Purchasing-level decisions have to be approved by someone who worries less about the money being s

Based on some similar experiences with a corporate client: - Purchasing-level decisions have to be approved by someone who worries less about the money being spent now than the situation the company will be in later. In other words, if I offer a free alternative to expensive commercial software, they'll be concerned that even though they'll save a few hundred or thousand dollars now, they'll be hamstrung if I ever leave, or if the free software vanishes. - These decisions are also often made by individuals who are not all that technically inclined, so they're suspicious of what they see as "amateur" versus "professional" (or commercial, or enterprise) software. - They're concerned about compatibility with their business partners. - They find many of the things that we like about the representation of free or open source software -- names like "Mozilla", "Firefox", "Thunderbird", "Foxit Reader", the FreeBSD daemon -- to be amateurish and annoying. Yes, that leaves the door wide open for startups. However, there's a reason why this tends to be the pattern as businesses go from "startup" to "enterprise".

gaius 17y ago
Not to mention that your startup can't spare the people for a (completely unnecessary in most cases) 6-month pitch/RFP/proof-of-concept process. Basically the incentives of the typical purchasing department are not well-aligned with the interests of the corporation as a whole.
- thaumaturgy 17y ago
  > Basically the incentives of the typical purchasing department are not well-aligned with the interests of the corporation as a whole. I don't know about "typical" purchasing departments (or personnel), but in the example I was giving, they actually are working in the interests of the corporation. My point was that the interests of the corporation -- in this example -- are different from the interests of those who devote more of their time to their computers. Here's one more anecdote: this same client recently replaced my inexpensive, well-tuned, up-to-date, carefully-configured OpenBSD firewall for their network with an off-the-shelf SonicWall device. That annoyed me, to say the least, and I'm of the opinion that the move has made their network less secure overall. On the other hand, I also realize that now they have a device with a simple, easy-to-understand interface, so when they choose to replace me with a full-time employee, they won't have to worry about whether the employee has any OpenBSD experience. It also guarantees that I'm not hiding any funky backdoors in their firewall, and hey, if there is a network incursion, then they can go after the SonicWall company ... versus not having anyone to catch the fault in the case that the OpenBSD box gets rooted. I don't want to come across as mean here, but honestly, if someone can't understand why corporations aren't using more open source software, then they don't have much experience with corporations.

gaius 17y ago

Not to mention that your startup can't spare the people for a (completely unnecessary in most cases) 6-month pitch/RFP/proof-of-concept process. Basically the incentives of the typical purchasing department are not well-aligned with the interests of the corporation as a whole.

thaumaturgy 17y ago
> Basically the incentives of the typical purchasing department are not well-aligned with the interests of the corporation as a whole. I don't know about "typical" purchasing departments (or personnel), but in the example I was giving, they actually are working in the interests of the corporation. My point was that the interests of the corporation -- in this example -- are different from the interests of those who devote more of their time to their computers. Here's one more anecdote: this same client recently replaced my inexpensive, well-tuned, up-to-date, carefully-configured OpenBSD firewall for their network with an off-the-shelf SonicWall device. That annoyed me, to say the least, and I'm of the opinion that the move has made their network less secure overall. On the other hand, I also realize that now they have a device with a simple, easy-to-understand interface, so when they choose to replace me with a full-time employee, they won't have to worry about whether the employee has any OpenBSD experience. It also guarantees that I'm not hiding any funky backdoors in their firewall, and hey, if there is a network incursion, then they can go after the SonicWall company ... versus not having anyone to catch the fault in the case that the OpenBSD box gets rooted. I don't want to come across as mean here, but honestly, if someone can't understand why corporations aren't using more open source software, then they don't have much experience with corporations.