[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-devel
Subject:    Re: Integrative work
From:       Aaron Seigo <aseigo () kde ! org>
Date:       2003-12-18 17:16:04
[Download RAW message or body]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On December 18, 2003 8:50, Guillaume Laurent wrote:
> On Thursday 18 December 2003 16:39, Aaron Seigo wrote:
> > > It's true
> > > that from a Cost-of-acquisition the GNOME platform is cheaper.
> >
> > well... "is cheaper for closed source development"...
>
> I don't see how. It should not be too hard to demonstrate that app
> development goes faster under KDE.

it was qualified with "for cost-of-acquisition". it is indeed less expensive 
to write KDE-apps when you factor in the total cost of development (TCD?), 
but there is an initial pill to swallow for a Qt license that you don't have 
with Gtk+, and it is this cost of acquisition that is being highlighted Gtk 
advocates.

which is where our PR comes in: we need to communicate more clearly and more 
often that acquisition costs are NOT the end of the story in a development 
cycle, and that KDE results in far cheaper costs in the long run.

this is also NOT like TCO arguments for server operating systems where getting 
an OS, any OS, installed means you have a system that now works. future admin 
costs are hideable, avoidable and vary. but with software development, the 
TCD costs are completely unavoidable, which is to say that just having access 
to a toolkit does not give you a working product to ship, nor does it even 
give you a working development framework.

- -- 
Aaron J. Seigo
while (!horse()); cart();
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2-rc1-SuSE (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/4eDU1rcusafx20MRAs41AJ0WuYfXiE1WVCBaVcdH/5U0rtDQLACbBc4r
WM6MkiLcHwHadO67QQPBErk=
=0SGo
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
 
>> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]