[LINK] No deal with Yahoo! re Zimbra and Australian non-profits

[Craig Sanders]

On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 06:47:13PM +1100, Richard Chirgwin wrote:
> Craig Sanders wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 11:29:12AM +1100, Darrell Burkey wrote:
> >> [...]
> >> They license based on 'domains'. So this is not an option.
> >
> > stupid restrictions like this are precisely why i avoid proprietary
> > software.  as if one organisation only ever has exactly one domain.

i glossed over this before, but it's actually an important issue (and
even roughly on-topic for LINK).

with arbitrary artificial limits like this, the software vendor is not
just providing a product that businesses and other organisations can
use, they are restricting how that organisation can present itself to
the world. effectively they are saying "you are only allowed one name.
if you want to use any of your other names, then you have to pay us
more for each one".

governments do that, with registered business names and incorporation
laws, and so on. what the hell makes a *software company* think it has
the right to impose such restrictions on organisations, that they may
only use one of their legal identities?

companies that do this aren't selling a product, they're baiting a trap
for control over what other organisations can do.


> With you on all counts, Craig. A year ago, my view may have been
> different; but having taken the plunge ('we don' need no stinkin'
> dual-boot), I have not found any reason to regret the decision.

good on you for taking the plunge.  i remember a year or two back you 
were dipping your toes in the water but still quite unconvinced that
you could go totally open source, or that open source could be as easy
to use.

craig

-- 
craig sanders <cas at taz.net.au>