Quoting Maarten Stolte <maarten.stolte@xxxxxxxxxxx>: > depends on the definition ofcourse, but I don't like the fact that, > afaik, some functionality is only available under other licenses, like > connecting to big boys' db's. Why? If you choose a Commerceware (e.g., Oracle, Sybase, etc...) or, worse yet, a Hostageware (e.g., MAPI/Outlook) solution, I have no problem with a vendor providing a Commerceware solution -- as long as their Freedomware (e.g., Opengroupware) works with other Freedomware (e.g., Mozilla) or Standardsware (e.g., iCalendar) software. Especially when the "main backend" is 100% Freedomware. -- Bryan P.S. The above terms are just the four categorizations of software I like to use. I don't think "proprietary" and "open" cover them very well. -- Bryan J. Smith, E.I. mailto:b.j.smith@xxxxxxxx http://thebs.org ------------------------------------------------------------------ [NT-based] Windows itself has never been the primary issue with security. Secure configuration of Windows prevents 98% of Windows software from working properly, especially Microsoft's own. Hence why a secure Windows is not an option for enterprises and consumers alike, since it would prevent them from working.
