Link Details

the most ridiculous quote from the article: "The bottom line is that Open Source will never be the best product offering because there's no investment backing it."

this is a naive and demonstrably false claim, made from the biased perspective of a windwards report (i.e. commercial) product manager. there are many investment models behind open source. some companies use it to sell on services & training (redhat, jboss, springsource), undercut competitors or raise the infrastructure bar (eclipse) or to funnel users into a freemium model (terracotta, smartgwt, vaadin). other motivations are the collective commons (inkscape, linux).

in each of the above cases, the open source products are considered top of their tree. open source has raised the bar (substantially) in most areas. biased and unsupportable arguments against it do not help the case for commercial software.

I wonder why GUIs should be better just because you pay for them...

Sounds like M$ has another shill on the payroll...

She has valid points why bash her post immediately? There are companies who are successful with their open source offerings because they get cash by supporting their products. She is not complaining about them. Her target is half baked open source software which are left out there, abondened and not supported anymore. That would be crippling if you initially started with it and have no resource to hack it, dont you agree? I guess it is time to leave Dzone for good, I do not see any professionalism, but fanboism all over.

Don't leave we need people with different viewpoints!!!!! :-) There is nothing wrong with having a different point of view it confirms that we are human and not robots. What would it look like if only the lunatics were left to run the asylum? I kid but you know what I mean.