[Ilugc] RE: Another storm
- From: prabhu_r@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Prabhu Ramachandran)
- Date: Fri Nov 26 01:37:20 2004
"SK" == Sriram Krishnan <ksriram@xxxxxxx> writes:
SK> Let me ask you something - why do you think of this only when
SK> Microsoft is involved? Let's say Redhat had entered into an
SK> agreement with the IITs to make them teach only 'free'
SK> software. Would you have protested then that the choice for
SK> students is now reduced (as you're eliminating all proprietary
SK> software)? Choice is good.Helping the students make an
SK> informed choice is another matter altogether.
This is a FOSS enthusiast list, what do you expect? MS lovers? That
said, I think you completely loose sight of several things. Please
read the whole list of points before responding.
1. People form opinions and likes and dislikes based on what they are
comfortable with.
2. If you make someone comfortable with a commercial tool say, then
you eventually do lock them in. It is like addiction.
3. Not everyone has the luxury of switching lock-stock-and-barrel to
the "new-fangled" language on the block. Once you invest heavily
learning the ropes of a piece of software and are comfortable with
it to the point of developing a whole lot of functionality with
it, it becomes next to impossible to switch to something else.
Students who are still fooling around writing code and learning
have this luxury. If you kept switching languages you'd probably
be an expert in variety of languages known (thats worth brag
value, yes) but its unlikely you'd have coded much given that
you've wasted so much time learning zillion languages rather than
write something truly useful.
4. MS has a lousy record. Their prime motive (as is the motive of
any good company) is to make profit. The knowledge of the
student, comfort of the user etc. are secondary. Given the chance
MS would want to own as much of the market. Sure, for competition
(and other reasons) it is good to have a small bunch of other
software companies, but this is good only so long as MS has the
largest market share.
5. Given this, it is easy to see where MS is headed. By baiting
students into using their software (by giving massive discounts),
getting them totally enmeshed in their tools, making sure their
tools don't run on other OS's and then conveniently asking these
students to pay through their noses once they are out of school
they see a sure shot way of making tons of money at the expense of
the poor student or the company she works for. What is so
honorable about it that its worth defending?! How does this
promote choice? It practically forces the students choice.
6. If MSFT really cared about computing and its users it would try to
make life easier for others who do want to make a choice w.r.t
what runs on their computer. So why don't we see MS porting some
of its applications to other OS's? Why not play fair? Why not go
with a policy of "live and let live" rather than "dominate
everything"?
7. Deciding what the school's policy is should really be up to the
school but any school with sense would train people on the basic
concepts and not on specific tools. If a computer engineer can't
pick up a fancy tool in a little while, he isn't worth hiring.
Computer scientists are not just people who know how to use a tool
or a language. I would think a CS student gets to learn a lot
more if he/she has access to the sources. If all a CS student
does is to use software, that isn't a degree worth having.
8. By making matters convenient (by lowering prices etc.) so that a
large fraction of the student population uses your (I don't mean
you personally) software in order that you make profits eventually
is a self serving goal. This has nothing to do with being nice or
giving folks a choice. On the contrary it is explcitly a device
to get people hooked to you.
[...]
SK> What's wrong with showing the students what the industry is
SK> using? And what if the students want it themselves?
OK, then show the software in all its light. Tell folks the real
price of the software and what they'd pay for it when they leave
school. Tell them that their software is proprietary and cannot be
ported by the user to his/her favorite OS. Tell them that they are
likely to never port the software to other OS's. Tell them that their
software runs mainly on x86's and perhaps alphas. Tell them that if
you have N machines you need *buy* N pieces of this software even
though you are just one user. Tell them that when they start using
their fancy tools that the same codes they wrote will not run on
another platform. Tell them that the reason for this is that they
want you to use their OS and not yours. Tell them that if you change
your hardware setup in some tiny way you need to get permission from
them. Tell them that they really want your money and could not care
less about anything else.
Surely I missed several there. Hopefully others will fill in.
True, any company with the kind of power MS has is likely to do what
MS is doing. My point is, free software is an excellent alternative
for CS students. You learn a lot, you can actually help a whole lot
of people (but perhaps not enough people care about helping, I don't
know) and you still get your job done for free. So certainly free
software is a better alternative than any commercial choice.
>> nor were you forced to use "Bombay Dying" as your fabric,
SK> Off-topic..I started laughing when I read this. My school used
Pot, meet kettle.
This whole thread is off-topic. Sriram, if you haven't realized
already, this is a Free/OSS enthusiast list. Don't expect people to
be kind to MS or to implicitly trust their motives. They haven't
given anyone a reason why they should. Besides, you've been here
before and seen what you get.
cheers,
prabhu
Other related posts: