Re: SMB Linux approaches?

Perhaps I have something to add... or remind people of, or whatever...

Chip Mefford wrote:

> Karsten M. Self wrote:
> | Overleaf:  a list of legacy MS Windows ills: Spam, Viruses, Computer
> | crashes, Operating system and application upgrade costs, Poor vendor
> | support, Security worries, Incompatible systems, Mandated hardware
> | upgrades, Popups, Spyware, ...
>
[snip]

> A lot of folks use the legacy windows ills every day, all day,
> and simply don't know that there is anything better, and don't
> particulary care. If they they have friends who use Macintoshes,
> they already get ears full of how evil Windows is.

I tend to not discuss how evil Windows is, it's simply bad juju. If 
they're using Windows, I tend to give them a copy of the GNU/Win II CD. 
Sometimes they try it. Sometimes not.
[snip]

>
> I've spent some time coming up with reasons why linux
> and gpled software stands quite well on it's own
> merits. Rather than as an "alternative".
>
> Again, I've been looking to market to not-for-profits,
> and so I'm hoping the concepts of intellectual freedom
> and completely open standards will have an appeal.

Same problem, different part of the world.

Down here in Trinidad and Tobago (T&T), myself and others have been 
trying (without success, I might add) to get various professional 
associations and businesses to work together on things. Collaborate. 
This is probably the most important part of Free Software; community 
does not extend to developers and administrators alone. This 
collaboration is important - it's what made Apache possible (and 
profitable). It's a way of raising the standards.

Last year I was very close to getting the Medical Professional 
Association of Trinidad and Tobago (MPATT) signed on to do medical 
admininstration software which could be used by not only Doctors in 
private practice, but also hospitals. Honestly, it probably could have 
been hacked out in one week - and been scalable and allow data 
interchangeability between Doctors, and so on. But Doctors, at least 
locally, weren't interested. They were more interested in purchasing the 
software for their own personal use - if I ever write it, I'm guaranteed 
2 sales, and they won't get much support out of me for what I can charge 
them. Many of them nodded appreciatively when I explained how the Apache 
system worked... how everyone helped fund the project.

But what I didn't realize is that many of these doctors don't use 
computers in their private practice, and that patient records are 
somewhat of a novelty. Disappointing. They also were concerned about 
training for their assistants; and then they were concerned about having 
to pay their assistant's more, and so on. But, you see, those things 
were not my problem. The system itself I could train people to use, and 
probably do so in less than a day.

The Doctors were also concerned about reporting information to Inland 
Revenue Service (IRS), and the fact that they couldn't hide information 
tax information away from them.

So in a group where I though collaboration would be high, I was defeated 
last year by the culture. And this taught me a few things. First of all, 
it's rare that I'll find someone of another generation who will be 
free-thinking enough to look 'outside the box'. As we get older, I 
expect the majority of people are worried about things outside of their 
box. Next, because of the infrastructure involved, Doctors do not 
benefit from having better records. It's worrisome that the patient's 
medical care would increase because of such records, but Doctors in 
private practice are... businesspeople. Down here, there aren't really 
enforced standards of medical care. So there's no reason to improve 
anything at cost when you can't charge your patients more for the same 
thing. (this was disturbing to me as a former Medical professional, and 
still is, but I recognize it is what it is).

Can Free Software help doctors? Yes. But do they want this help right 
now? No. So if I get some time (where I have money in the bank to do 
it), I'll write the code and GPL it - distributing it Freely and at not 
cost. To assure that I make money off of it,  there's the training and 
even support. Sound familiar? (Does anyone know if people actually pay 
Mozilla for support yet?!)

I think what I'm getting at here is that we're not selling Free Software 
as much as we're selling solutions. The solution is more important to 
the customer than Free Software, usually. If you can solve a problem 
better, you'll get the business. If you use Free Software to do it, 
they'll come on board once the solution is there. Free Software, by 
itself, is not a solution.

-- 

Taran Rampersad
[email protected]
http://www.knowprose.com
http://www.fsc.cc/
http://www.uwi.edu/scs/
http://www.a42.com
http://www.xeebra.com

Coming Soon: eAsylum.net