Jim Phillips writes:
>
>There was an interesting essay in the 11-5-01 edition of
>InfoWorld which talks about the demise of a software company:
>
> http://www.infoworld.com/articles/op/xml/01/11/05/011105opsource.xml
>
> Here's one paragraph:
>
>"If this were the world of closed-source software, this event
>would have been devastating to customers. Any customer who had
>employed this software would be scrambling to find a replacement.
>Plans and cost estimates would be hastily constructed to migrate
>to a different product. And then there would be the questions
>to be answered from senior management, "How could you let
>this happen to us? How could you let us rely on such a
>fragile company?""

And I wonder what your point is Jim. Because after your 'paragraph'
there is this:

"A software supplier that closes its doors is the nightmare of every
IT manager, but that rule no longer applies in the open-source world.
The loss of a company does not necessitate the loss of a software solution."

"When code is open source, it develops a life of its own even after the
demise of a software provider. The source code is available for
continuation of the product. In the case of Nautilus, for example,
some of the original Eazel developers are still involved in the project,
as well as many of the open-source developers who were active before
Eazel's demise. The official Nautilus mailing list used by developers has
had more than 2,500 messages since the company closed. And Nautilus has
grown to be a popular addition to the latest Gnome desktops on new
Linux releases. Not bad for the product of a defunct company."

Are you advocating that MPE be open source?

Duane Percox

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *