381–390 of 395 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>there is no Linux outlook With the GH aquisition I'll be shocked if we don't see most of MS's desktop stuff, including Office, move to Electron/WebAssembly in the next few years.
Outlook is already a bloated beast. Moving it to Electron would be a disaster. I can't see it happening. Maybe a 'lite' version of outlook, but not the version enterprises use.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Right. I mean, how many people have personal Exchange accounts?
That is true but at a lot of people do use outlook.com / hotmail.com for their personal email. Those are effectively Exchange accounts (MS finished migrating them to Exchange last year). So Hiri works with those too.
What's the advantage vs IPMI or POP?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As one of the "Linux for FLOSS" users--and, yes, quite loud about it--I am inclined to agree. I would pay good money for a high quality application on Linux. But in large part, one of the less-philosophical, more-practical things that I value about FLOSS is the opportunity to fix things if something doesn't work right. While I would gladly purchase an incredible, closed source application, I would much more value the…
I've always thought that this is the key to bridging the gap between proprietary and OSS, and it's what we do with our software. In our case, the source code does cost extra, but that's because we're selling developer libraries and we typically need to provide extra support to customers that purchase the source code because they are also (typically) customizing the source code in some way.
Of course video games are highly public consumer products. So you can't actually abuse their model because if your game is successful it will be well known.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The same people who have been writing it in the past. And who said there are no means of making money? You're just assuming something which isn't true just because you can't come up with an explanation.
Who are those people? Most are paid or sponsored by corporations.
I think this piece (along with many, many others in the genre) is unduly discounting the practical implications of a proprietary binary for users, preferring to blame a preference for open source solely on a "fundamentalist FOSS mentality". For example, my next GPU is going to be a Radeon largely because I'm tired of the weird issues that come with installing/updating proprietary drivers, the lack of transparency aro…
I think that having an open-source OS and whatever-source applications is having the best of both worlds.
Let me repeat that: the base system should be open, including all drivers, to level the playing field, but we also should be able to choose any solution in an open market, again, to get the best technology possible for us.
In other words, if I want to use some proprietary software, like I use Sublime Text, it does not affect you, and I don't think you can decide or limit in any way the software I can use.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Who are those people? Most are paid or sponsored by corporations.
Well just let them continue to do so, then?
Why should software development be any different than any other profession where people get paid for their work?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the difference between the slurred fundamentalist (connoting a terrorist-like figure) and a tech fundamentalist is objectively clear.
Perhaps "purist" is a better word here?
The big thing I see missing from all this analysis is the home vs. work distinction. You have people saying "Linux users choose FLOSS because of philosophy, and proprietary software goes against this", you have users saying "I'd have tried it if it were FLOSS and I could just download it and try it", etc., but the problem is: this is a product for working with an Exchange server. How many individual users have a need…
Hi there, I'm the author of the blog post. Some context you may find interesting, and maybe I should do a follow up post about this. We were very enterprise focused, but it just didn't work. We were trying to displace MS Outlook. And unfortunately, most people want to stick with Outlook. Not because it's better, but because it's what they know. We found that even if we convinced 8 out of 10 people in a company to buy…
2) I notice you've chosen 7 days as the length of the free trial. Why that rather than the 21ish days it takes to form a habit?
3) For your annual subscription plan, how do you avoid the user's credit card being expired by the 4th time you try to charge it?