Re: What we want from software vendors
On 24/06/2008, Dotan Cohen <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> 2008/6/24 Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso <email@example.com>:
> > On 23/06/2008, Dotan Cohen <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> >> 2) I must be interoperable with the other engineers running Solidworks.
> > Your definition of interoperable seems a little weird. It sounds too
> > much like the definition of vendor lock-in.
> Dotan's definition of "interoperable": Dotan can receive, edit, and
> return documents to other users.
> Note that if Dotan cannot be interoperable, then Dotan cannot work. If
> Dotan cannot work, then Dotan's family starves.
If it really is either vendor lock-in or starvation, then vendor
lock-in is clearly the choice to make. But call it what it is, vendor
lock-in, and please don't request vendor lock-in from vendors. If
that's all they can give you and you starve otherwise, fine, but make
it clear that this is *not* what you want (or if you do enjoy vendor
lock-in, please don't make it more difficult for those of us who don't
enjoy it). Situations like this is how we got into the fine MSFT
Office format mess we're in.
- Jordi G. H.