MozillaZine

Full Article Attached Evaluating Commercial Open Source Projects

Thursday April 22nd, 1999

A recent Forbes article characterized Mozilla as a "flop". The article had so many inaccuracies that I felt a rebuttal was required. At the same time, I felt that some light needed to be shed on the differences between commercial Open Source projects and "all volunteer" Open Source projects. What follows (click "Full Article" below) is a rebuttal to the assertions in the Forbes article and my opinion on what can reasonably be expected from a commercial Open Source project.

As always, the opinions are my own, and do not reflect the opinions of mozilla.org (which MozillaZine is not affiliated with).


#54 Re:Evaluating Commercial Open Source Projects

by SomeSmartAss <improv@magma.ca>

Monday April 26th, 1999 11:42 AM

You are replying to this message

"There has to be some demonstrable benefit to end users to get them to switch."

- Smaller footprint (more space on hard drive, which is important on older machines)

- allows them to change the UI (being able to customize the look and feel of something, even if its with wookie heads, makes it fell more "mine", look at NeoPlanet)

- not suseptable to the Melissa virus. (fear of viruses is more previlant than actual virus attacks. How many "Don't open any e-mail entitled ....!!! it will automatically destroy your hard drive!!!!" messages do you get a month?)

- my son/daughter (in-law) who works for that big computer company said it was better. (deciples, start your bible thumping NOW!!!)

just a couple I could think of.