Subject: RE: [open-source] Sun to start charging for Star Office
To: 'Charles Shannon Hendrix' <shannon@widomaker.com>
From: Stephane St Hilaire <ssthilaire@hyperchip.com>
List: netbsd-users
Date: 03/28/2002 10:37:44
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C1D66E.80E87870
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Charles Shannon Hendrix [mailto:shannon@widomaker.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 12:13 AM
> To: netbsd-users
> Subject: Re: [open-source] Sun to start charging for Star Office
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 26, 2002 at 01:07:33PM -0500, Stephane St Hilaire wrote:
>
> > Just being curious, but what real advances would you rather
> time was spent
> > on ?
>
> You mean you can't think of anything better than that?
Better than what ? I was just asking a simple question that's all.
>
> How about look around and you'll have a list of decent projects that
> get little or no resources in short order.
>
> There is no programmer shortage in the US or anywhere else, there are
> just countless thousands of them being wasted patching holes
> and putting
> out fires, and that's when they are writing yet another
> program that we
> don't really need.
>
> I really wish we *did* have a shortage, because that would
> mean we were
> actually working on the right things.
I don't quite understand if they are plenty of resources and the "right"
projects don't get addressed, how having less resources would help. Perhaps
the real question is why aren't these "right" projects (what ever they are)
being done now.
>
> > True, but the goal of any company in a capitalist system is
> to grow and keep
> > on growing (if this is cynical than call me a cynic), which
> by definition
> > means that ultimately it wants to become a monopoly (the
> name of the game).
> > Now the fact that winning in the game of capitalism means that the
> > government is going to break you up (one nice reward for a
> job well done)
> > kind of makes you wonder about the validity of the game in
> the first place.
>
> That's not at all a definition of capitalism.
>
I'm not giving the definition of capitalism but stating the obvious goal of
a player in the system.
> Growth is just about the most misused term in business, and one of the
> worst targets you can set for a business.
Down-sizing is much better.
>
> Let me tell you something that will blow the mind of (what appears to
> be nearly) every business geek you meet: a company does not
> need to grow
> to survive and be in the game.
Perhaps but you need to first make some money say with a X product and
become profitable. Once you have achieved that goal you can stick with
working on product X and hope to keep the market share you have, or attempt
a venture into another market with product Y. If product X looses ground,
you have product Y still making money... I'm just saying that growth from a
product diversification/sales point of view can help it survive.
>
> One more: a company's stock price does not (have to) mean
> anything about
> the health of the company.
That's 100% right of course.
> Business exists to serve customers and provide jobs, and that's it.
In Utopia you are probably right.
> It has no "right" to exist, to grow, to make stockholders happy, or
> to survive.
It doesn't have rights it has obligations.
> The moment it serves no consumer need, it has lost it's
> true value. Capitalism is based on ideas of funding and freedom that
> do not include stomping the shit out of everyone in sight, or
> trying to
> preserve yourself in a world that doesn't need you.
Capitalism is also based on the notion of competition wich means up to a
certain degree a struggle/survival of the fittest.
> Some of the most successful companies are strictly long-term
> investments,
> have never had soaring stock, and may have even experience an overall
> negative growth over a period of decades.
By long term you mean what, centuries ?
Steph
------_=_NextPart_001_01C1D66E.80E87870
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META NAME=3D"Generator" CONTENT=3D"MS Exchange Server version =
5.5.2653.12">
<TITLE>RE: [open-source] Sun to start charging for Star Office</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<BR>
<BR>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>> -----Original Message-----</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> From: Charles Shannon Hendrix [<A =
HREF=3D"mailto:shannon@widomaker.com">mailto:shannon@widomaker.com</A>]<=
/FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 12:13 AM</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> To: netbsd-users</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> Subject: Re: [open-source] Sun to start =
charging for Star Office</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> On Tue, Mar 26, 2002 at 01:07:33PM -0500, =
Stephane St Hilaire wrote:</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > Just being curious, but what real advances =
would you rather </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> time was spent</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > on ?</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> You mean you can't think of anything better =
than that?</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Better than what ? I was just asking a simple =
question that's all.</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> How about look around and you'll have a list of =
decent projects that</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> get little or no resources in short =
order.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> There is no programmer shortage in the US or =
anywhere else, there are</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> just countless thousands of them being wasted =
patching holes </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> and putting</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> out fires, and that's when they are writing yet =
another </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> program that we</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> don't really need.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> I really wish we *did* have a shortage, because =
that would </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> mean we were</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> actually working on the right things.</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>I don't quite understand if they are plenty of =
resources and the "right" projects don't get addressed, how =
having less resources would help. Perhaps the real question is why =
aren't these "right" projects (what ever they are) being done =
now.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > True, but the goal of any company in a =
capitalist system is </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> to grow and keep</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > on growing (if this is cynical than call =
me a cynic), which </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> by definition</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > means that ultimately it wants to become a =
monopoly (the </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> name of the game).</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > Now the fact that winning in the game of =
capitalism means that the</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > government is going to break you up (one =
nice reward for a </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> job well done)</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > kind of makes you wonder about the =
validity of the game in </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> the first place.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> That's not at all a definition of =
capitalism.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>I'm not giving the definition of capitalism but =
stating the obvious goal of a player in the system.</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>> Growth is just about the most misused term in =
business, and one of the</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> worst targets you can set for a =
business.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Down-sizing is much better.</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> Let me tell you something that will blow the =
mind of (what appears to</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> be nearly) every business geek you meet: a =
company does not </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> need to grow</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> to survive and be in the game.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Perhaps but you need to first make some money say =
with a X product and become profitable. Once you have achieved that =
goal you can stick with working on product X and hope to keep the =
market share you have, or attempt a venture into another market with =
product Y. If product X looses ground, you have product Y still making =
money... I'm just saying that growth from a product =
diversification/sales point of view can help it survive.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> One more: a company's stock price does not =
(have to) mean </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> anything about</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> the health of the company.</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>That's 100% right of course.</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>> Business exists to serve customers and provide =
jobs, and that's it.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>In Utopia you are probably right.</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>> It has no "right" to exist, to grow, =
to make stockholders happy, or</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> to survive. </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>It doesn't have rights it has obligations.</FONT>
</P>
<BR>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>> The moment it serves no consumer need, it has =
lost it's</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> true value. Capitalism is based on ideas =
of funding and freedom that</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> do not include stomping the shit out of =
everyone in sight, or </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> trying to</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> preserve yourself in a world that doesn't need =
you. </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Capitalism is also based on the notion of =
competition wich means up to a certain degree a struggle/survival of =
the fittest.</FONT></P>
<BR>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>> Some of the most successful companies are =
strictly long-term </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> investments,</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> have never had soaring stock, and may have even =
experience an overall</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> negative growth over a period of =
decades.</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>By long term you mean what, centuries ?</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Steph</FONT>
</P>
</BODY>
</HTML>
------_=_NextPart_001_01C1D66E.80E87870--