On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 20:15:39 +0100, Keith Willshaw wrote:
[regarding compiling open source software]

All of which negates the point of open source which is to
be able to make changes.

The point of open source isn't so much that *you* can make changes,
but that *everyone else* can as well. Which means, for a popular
open source program, the changes you want have perhaps already been
made...

Frankly all Joe Blow wants
is to be able to pop his CD in the drive and hit
the OK Button when its asks if he wants to install it.

Yes, and you can do that with Linux.

typically using Java's JAR format: you just put the .jar file in the
relevant directory.

Java is however horribly resource intense

It can be, but it is also an appropriate solution to many problems.

The world's most populous country is going for Linux in a big way.
How much market share will open-soruce apps have in 2010?

That depends on whether or not they software writers ever get
paid for their work, that market is notorious for piracy.

Piracy is irrelevant consideration to open source software. It is
relevant to proprietary software, where it can reduce revenues,
which is likely to cause open source to predominate over time.

I don't see govmts going bust, that's not really a consideration for
them.

Governments arent the main customers for software.

For operating systems and office suites, they are. In the UK, the
main customer for these sorts of software is the state. The same in
most other countries.


--
A: top posting

Q: what's the most annoying thing about Usenet?