The Industry choice

[Bulba!]

On Sat, 01 Jan 2005 13:28:16 -0600, "Rob Emmons"
<rmemmons at member.fsf.org> wrote:

>> For managers of companies it's worse: the company makes
>> VERY substantial investments into any technology it "marries",
>> and that means big losses if it goes. Long-term stability
>> of this technology in terms of "we're not going to be left out
>> in cold alone with this technology to feed it" means a lot 
>> to them. Even a poor technology with external backing 
>> of big, stable vendor is better than the excellent technology 
>> without ......

>There is the stability issue you mention... but also probably the fear
>issue.  If you choose a solution from a major company -- then it fails for
>some reason or they drop the product -- it's their fault -- you've got an
>automatic fall guy.  

True. I have a bit of interest in economics, so I've seen e.g.
this example - why is it that foreign branches of companies
tend to cluster themselves in one city or country (e.g.
China right now)? According to standard economics it should
not happen - what's the point of getting into this overpriced
city if elsewhere in this country you can find just as good
conditions for business. 

The point is obviously "cover your ass" attitude of managers:
if this investment fails, this manager can defend himself
"but everybody invested in that particular place, too, so
you see, at the time it was not a bad decision, we could
not predict... yadda yadda". 






--
It's a man's life in a Python Programming Association.