Re: [Fsfe-uk] Fwd: OSS Watch inaugural conference, 11 December 2003

[Andrew Savory]

Hi,

On 28 Nov 2003, at 10:45, Alex Hudson wrote:

> Personally, I would think that an "open source" conference should not
> have proprietary vendors.

This is the source of the misunderstanding. We're not talking about an 
"open source" conference - that's the sort of thing AFFS should 
organise ;-) - we're talking about a conference run by an advisory 
service which is all about informing people of the choices involved in 
using open source software. One of those choices is most certainly 
"don't use it", and so it makes a lot of sense to have a representative 
of the alternative there to talk about it.

I genuinely believe that an honest representative of proprietary 
software would have an awful lot to contribute to any open source 
conference, since a major part of switching to open source is 
interoperability. Proprietary vendors are as well placed as anyone to 
tell us how easy it is(n't) to integrate their products and OSS 
products in a mixed economy.

>  If people want information on proprietary
> software, then there are plenty of conferences for them - people are
> more than able to get both sides of the story.

Well, this conference is about giving them both sides of the story, so 
let's not try to boot out one side, eh?

>  I think the point was
> that it's unfair that a conference about free software would also have
> to talk about proprietary software to be seen as balanced when the
> reverse is not true.

But, you know, I think this is actually a very flawed argument (and not 
just because we're not talking about a conference about free software). 
One of the best things about Free Software is that it's about a "level 
playing field", proving that we can compete on quality and service 
rather than by lock-in and unfair trade practices. By inviting "the 
opposition" to our events, we show that we have nothing to fear and 
nothing to hide and that we feel we can compete with them on any turf.

And don't forget that to be successful you have to know your enemy. 
Most evangelists seem to have spent too little time in the real world 
lately, and are far less effective as a result.

> I agree totally that to be balanced, you need to recognise that
> alternatives exist. I would be worried, though, if Microsoft were able
> to use the platform at OSSWatch conference to promote their
> technologies. I don't believe that's balance, or recognising the
> alternative - neural promotion of free software doesn't require
> promotion of proprietary software.

Like I say, it's about representing the mixed economy, and you can only 
do that with a mixed selection of speakers.

I like the side of "neural promotion" though. Tell me more! :-)


Andrew.

--
Andrew Savory, Managing Director, Luminas Limited
Tel: +44 (0)870 741 6658  Fax: +44 (0)700 598 1135
Web: http://www.luminas.co.uk/
Orixo alliance: http://www.orixo.com/