2. 考研
  3. If open-source software is supposed to be free, how does anyone selling it make any money? It’s not that different from how othe

If open-source software is supposed to be free, how does anyone selling it make any money? It’s not that different from how othe

admin2010-11-27  103
问题     If open-source software is supposed to be free, how does anyone selling it make any money? It’s not that different from how other software companies make money.
    You’d think that a software company would make most of its money from, well, selling software. But you’d be wrong. For one thing, companies don’t sell software, strictly speaking; they license it. The profit margin on a software license is nearly 100 percent, which is why Microsoft gushes billions of dollars every quarter.
    But what’s the value of a license to a customer? A license doesn’t deliver the code, provide the utilities to get a piece of software running, or answer the phone when something inevitably goes wrong. The value of software, in short, doesn’t lie in the software alone. The value is in making sure the soft-ware does its job. Just as a traveler should look at the overall price of a vacation package instead of obsessing over the price of the plane ticket or hotel mom, a smart tech buyer won’t focus on how much the license costs and ignore the support contract or the maintenance agreement.
    Open-source is not that different. If you want the software to work, you have to pay to ensure it will work. The open-source companies have refined the software model by selling subscriptions. They roll together support and maintenance and charge an annual fee, which is a healthy model, though not quite as wonderful as Microsoft’s money-raking one. Tellingly, even Microsoft is casting an envious eye at aspects of the open-source business model. The company has been taking halting steps toward a similar subscription scheme for its software sales. Microsoft’s subscription program, known as Soft-ware Assurance, provides maintenance and support together with a software license. It lets you up-grade to Microsoft’s next version of the software for a predictable sum. But it also contains an implicit threat: If you don’t switch to Software Assurance now, who knows how much Microsoft will charge you when you decide to upgrade?
    Chief information officers hate this kind of "assurance", since they’re often perfectly happy running older versions of software that are proven and stable. Microsoft, on the other hand, rakes in the software-licensing fees only when customers upgrade. Software Assurance is Microsoft’s attempt to get those same licensing fees but wrap them together with the service and support needed to keep systems running. That’s why Microsoft finds the open-source model so threatening: open-source companies have no vested interest in getting more licensing fees and don’t have to pad their service contracts with that extra cost. In the end, the main difference between open-source and proprietary software companies may be the size of the check you have to write.
选项 A、the value of software should be considered as a whole.
B、tech buyers should care little about license.
C、a license doesn’t comprise support and maintenance.
D、customers have to pay a lot to get a license.
答案A
解析 本题问作者在第三段提到旅游者的例子是为了说明…。第三段末句提到旅游者应关注旅游的总报价，而不是单单注意机票或者酒店的单项价格，软件购买者不应只关注许可证要花多少钱，还要注意技术支持和保修等协议。可以看出，作者举旅游者的例子是为了说明软件的价值应该作为一个整体考虑，而不能只关注许可证。故"软件的价值应该从整体上考虑"正确。科技产品购买者应不在乎许可证：过度引申。文意是说不要只关注许可证，不能由此得出应该不在乎许可证的结论。实际上本项也属意义消极项，如果购买者都无视许可证，岂不成了支持盗版。许可证不是由支持和维护构成的：肤浅项。许可证与支持和维护并无包含关系，这仅是常识性的事实，与作者举此例要说明的问题不相干。注意像这种意义肤浅、单纯就事论事的选项一般不会是正解。顾客必须付很多钱才能得到许可证：例证题要联系上下文，本例出现在第三段，第三段所讨论的问题就是论证软件的价值不应只考虑计：可证，本例也正是为了说明这个问题。而本选项内容是第二段末句涉及到的内容(微软的许可证利润率比较高)。
转载请注明原文地址:https://www.kaotiyun.com/show/ACZ4777K
0

考研英语一

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)