While I agree that there is a reorientation to be made toward open source, I do not think that there is such a big change in communication with the community; it is simply a different community.
When you found a bug or a capability that you needed in Microsoft Word or Excel, what did you do? If you were big enough (ie, UPS, GE, Exxon, etc.), you might have some direct influence on Microsoft Corporation. Short of that, you posted messages and questions on web sites (was BBS systems) and media pundits would take up your case in order to have some material to write about so they could sell advertising. Once the level around an issue rose to an adequate level, Microsoft Corporation would put a line on a project plan and order more Jolt cola. You suffered with the bug or did without the feature until Microsoft released a patch or you had the opportunity to pay for the next version.
So, what is different about using open source? Well, there is generally not an 800 number to call, but there is no shortage of ways to communicate to the community about the bug identified or capability needed. The media does not follow such issues as closely since there is not any obvious organization to pay them for advertising. More significantly, if the media produced content that aided or abetted users of open source software, the proprietary product vendors would quickly let them know of their displeasure. And their reduced advertising budget for the media outlet.
Discussion on:
Message 10 of 1
The best of ZDNet, delivered
ZDNet Newsletters
Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox
