For me, software freedom is like the tie breaker.  I will never offer a
product suggestion that does not fit the needs of the business just as I
never would higher an unqualified candidate because he is a friends son or
nephew or something.  The most important thing is that the choice makes
business sense. After that we can consider freedom, but you can not have an
company that uses open technology if you don't have a viable company.

However, that said, full benefits of exchange are possible without MS,
however  even products that offer an open "light" version of their product
often cost more to start and maintain then Exchange. (Zibra is a good
example)

That said, I use OO not MS Office at home, I almost never recommend MSSQL, I
use Linux as a desktop even at work (Though I often have and MS machine next
to it, even at home... Mostly because I can not get WINE to work constantly
well for me) so F/OSS is important, but when you put a dolor figure on it,
it is not as important as the projects success, or more to the point, my
job.  However, while I would not higher him to a full position, I would
apprentice a friends son or nephew who is willing to work for what he is
worth or less just to gain experience. And I would be more then willing to
train said friends relation on my own time.  However I would never risk the
companies money on some one I felt was unqualified.  Many time Open Source
software is the rite candidate for the job, other time it is the friends
relation. If I can not see a 2-5 year return for the company then I can not
consider it for the job. In many ways I am a cold hatred business person,
and for that I make few apologies.

-----Original Message-----
From: plug-discuss-bounces@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
[mailto:plug-discuss-bounces@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us] On Behalf Of Alan
Dayley
Sent: Monday, February 23, 2009 3:04 PM
To: Main PLUG discussion list
Subject: Re: OT:Exchange good? - And the flame wars begin
(Was:Re:newhotness?)

These thread(s) which I spawned have been a mixed blessing.  I learned much
but sometimes felt like I opened the door to "sales pitches" for lock-in
technology.  Overall I have appreciated the discussion, education and civil
disagreement.

It is interesting to me, this balance between getting the job done and
maintaining software freedom.  It's obvious from this discussion and from
things I have experienced, that software freedom is usually not highly
valued.  Worse, it's not even considered in many cases.

I have been in situations where arguing for freedom is a very difficult
thing to get across.  And I failed.  Then, years later when the closed,
proprietary solution is entrenched and causing problems, the same people
that picked it now see that the Free choice would have been better.  But, in
their words, "It's too late to change."

It is this entrenchment and then exclusion of all Free Software alternatives
that Exchange causes.  Because the full benefits of Exchange are not
possible without MS Software from server to client, it is a bastion of
lock-in.  And businesses seems to enjoy living in that gilded cage.

Yea, maybe the Free Software choices are not as "fully integrated" but
someday, with those of us who value freedom resisting the allure of lock-in,
someday maybe the Free choices that are good enough will be valued for the
freedom they protect.

I can dream, can't I?

Alan
---------------------------------------------------
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

---------------------------------------------------
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss