RES: [Paraview] ParaView and Ensight

Sat Nov 11 19:32:25 EST 2006

Well, this discussion could last forever...

I wouldn't like to "dispute the facts" that Kent has written on that forum.
In fact, I was too far putting my opinions there... I understand that those
facts are incontrovertible as you said. I only got astonished by the
attitude itself. I'd never imagine someone making such arguments, being them
reasonable or not, in a public forum. It's not noble to inflame US citizens
against an open source public funded project. This kind of behaviour is not
for a company's president and we have some reservation if this guys is
really who he's saying.

By the way, I don't have any right to discuss what north americans do with
their taxes. I'm a Brazilian (a south american) who already have a huge tax
load to pay (each Brazilian works 4 months per year just to pay taxes). In
my case, I'm only concerned if my government has been giving a good destiny
to our money or not (unfortunately, our government has too much to learn
yet). Moreover, I'm not worried if my money is being applied in an open
source project or not. BTW, I'm almost sure that our research funds do not
have any restriction against giving away softwares or whatever public
funded. If so, I'd like to know the excuses behind the restriction,
otherwise, If the project is really public and will bring good results, for
me or anyone else within my country or not -- *help any people around the
world* -- it's more than enough (IMHO).

Going further, how many US citizens work in a Linux platform nowadays?! Did
anybody (from US, Brazil, China, Iraq, Angola, wherever) give any cent to
Linus Torvald?! I don't think so and we could imagine what would have
happened if Finland had funds restriction like some NASA projects have
(restricted only to US citizens).

Maybe the Kent's message could make us think how wrong and old some business
model are. We know that people have been making good money with open source
projects. They sell support, books, T-shirts, especific software
development, etc..., etc..., etc... they put more value in their knowledge
than in their products itself and it's also incontrovertible. CEI should
think about it. They could start change their business model a little.

>>> Do you think that ParaView would be in as good a shape IF the U.S.
taxpayer did not fund it via the DoE and DoD? <<<

Who knows?! I think that the main fact which makes open source projects
boost their grow is the model of sharing knowledge among different people
with different experience, inside or outside the main development team.
Furthermore, I'm sure there's a large number of open source projects in a
good shape without relying only in government funds...

Respectfully 

Renato

  _____  

De: paraview-bounces+rnelias=nacad.ufrj.br at paraview.org
[mailto:paraview-bounces+rnelias=nacad.ufrj.br at paraview.org] Em nome de Paul
Adams
Enviada em: sábado, 11 de novembro de 2006 15:52
Para: paraview at paraview.org
Assunto: Re: [Paraview] ParaView and Ensight

Do you dispute the facts that Kent Misegades lays out?

1. ParaView was funded by DoE and DoD labs.  That is an incontrovertible
fact.  When you launch ParaView, you see the Los Alamos National Laboratory,
Sandia National Laboratories, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories, and
U.S. Army Research Laboratory logos on the splash page.  In case you miss
it, you can always find it under Help-->About.
2. The national laboratories are funded by U.S. taxpayers.  Again, this is
an incontrovertible fact. 
3. ParaView is given away freely.  Again, this is an incontrovertible fact.

Do you think that ParaView would be in as good a shape IF the U.S. taxpayer
did not fund it via the DoE and DoD?  

My point is this: 
1. Kitware received U.S. taxpayer money via the DoD and DoE to make it the
product it is.
2. Open-Source is not a panacea.  Paying someone good money to develop a
good product is still the best way to make good software. 
3. EnSight is still a great product and can do things that ParaView cannot
do.  
4. ParaView is still a great product and can do things that EnSight cannot
do.  

I view ParaView and EnSight as tools in the toolbox.  I use whichever one
will best solve the current problem I have.  Sometimes the answer is that
neither one will solve the problem so I have to write my own code.  

Paul Adams

On 11/9/06, Renato N. Elias <rnelias at nacad.ufrj.br> wrote: 

Hi people,

I think ParaView has been annoying some CEI's guys out there

http://www.cfd-online.com/Forum/main.cgi?read=49375

Look at this: 
"...ParaView has been developed at a great expense to US taxpayers at DOD
and DOE labs, then is given away freely to anyone on the planet. If you pay
taxes in the US, I am sure that you find this as disagreeable as do 
we...(Kent Misegades President, CEI Inc.)"

This is the worst argument I've ever seen... how disgusting... :-(

Renato.

p.s.: this message is not to inflame anyone. It's just to show how dirty
someone can be to recover his "mine of gold", which has been vanishing...

_______________________________________________
ParaView mailing list
ParaView at paraview.org  <mailto:ParaView at paraview.org> 
http://www.paraview.org/mailman/listinfo/paraview

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://public.kitware.com/pipermail/paraview/attachments/20061111/aea5dfb7/attachment.html