Ask HN: Which project does not have any good open-source alternatives? • Hacker News Board

Re: Ask HN: Which project does not have any good open-source alternatives?

#281

Post by ccbogel » Wed, Jan 01, 2020, 12:45 AM UTC

qualqual wrote: post #120

Qualitative Data Analysis systems. RQDA and QualCoder are under development, but the pace is generally slow and many features are buggy and remain untested on common operating systems. Some products out there on the market are better than others (I use MaxQDA) but come at a hefty price, even with a student discount. Also transcription software. Not voice recognition, but software that assists with manual transcriptio…

Hi, qualcoder developer here. Yes qualcoder has some bugs, and limited testing on Mac OS or Windows for now. However, thanks for the advice regards manual transcription with key shortcuts, I will try and incorporate that idea. There is another free qual web-based product called Taguette www.taguette.org which you might be interested in.

Re: Ask HN: Which project does not have any good open-source alternatives?

#282

Post by montjoy » Fri, Jan 03, 2020, 10:15 PM UTC

notacoward wrote: post #214

montjoy wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you give a better example of what you mean? There are plenty of multi-tenancy file systems. Do you mean QoS by user or over the network?

> There are plenty of multi-tenancy file systems Name one. What I mean by multi-tenant is that the namespace, security space, capacity quota and I/O quota are fully isolated and managed at the storage-system API , not via other facilities such as cgroups which aren't even applicable beyond a single-host level. Each tenant gets something that looks like a private service with predictable limits (appropriate for an SLA…

Ok sure in that context I can’t think of any. The closest thing I know of (with a limited understanding of what you mean) is NFS4.2.

Re: Ask HN: Which project does not have any good open-source alternatives?

#283

Post by scholia » Thu, Jan 09, 2020, 12:37 AM UTC

labawi wrote: post #264

scholia wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(1) Cost of software is relatively small compared with the cost of employing the people who use it. (2) Cost of software is relatively small compared with the cost of retraining staff and changing business workflows and processes to cope with different software. (3) Changing to new software is relatively simple compared with the problems of making all your staff, your contractors and your suppliers change to new soft…

(5) Munich might not be a valid example. Parent talked about a consortium, for which a single city administration might be a bit small, and AFAIK the failure was not necessarily technical.

Belated reply (Christmas!)

> the failure was not necessarily technical

Well, that was exactly my point ;-)

If you only look at the technical issues, ur doin it rong.