[CLUE-Talk] "red hat - the new redmond?" comment from mainstream online media

[Matt Gushee]

On Sat, Sep 07, 2002 at 11:31:03AM -0600, Jed S. Baer wrote:
> 
> Businesses have to weight the cost/benefit of all these issues, including
> the ability to hire people who are already conversant in "technology X".
> OK, I'm contradicting my previous argument. ;-) But that isn't always the
> case. So it still comes down to, not TCO, but "total cost of
> productivity". Can a business save money by switching to Linux? In the
> very short term, especially with larger businesses, probably not. In the
> long term I suspect the lower licensing and server costs would outweigh
> other factors.

And therein lies the rub. With a political economy dominated by the
ideology* that shareholders are the only stakeholders that matter, and
shareholders impatient for a quick return on their investments, it takes
uncommon foresight and courage for corporate leaders to make long-term
investment of any sort. Though we can hope that that impatience has been
tempered a bit by the collapse of the "new economy."

 * Yes, I'm aware there are legal constraints. But as I understand it,
   the existence of legal obligations to shareholders, and the relative
   absence of obligations to customers and employees, is a fairly recent
   phenomenon, which is a product of the ideology I mention. And I know
   for a fact that other countries (e.g. Japan and Europe) do things a
   little differently. Now I know this is going to set off another
   argument, and somebody's going to point out that, recent developments
   notwithstanding, the US has been relatively successful in the global
   economy. My answer to that is that the rules of international trade
   are constructed to favor the American model. Unfortunately I have no
   time today to take that any farther, so critique as you like.

-- 
Matt Gushee
Englewood, Colorado, USA
mgushee at havenrock.com
http://www.havenrock.com/