Developers need to produce different versions of their applications – one for Linux on a Sun, one for the PC version and so on.There is nothing wrong with people developing code and distributing it to their friends, colleagues and like-minded folk on the Net and, in all likelihood, this will have a positive effect on the industry; but to state that all such software is inherently better than anything developed by the evil empire in Redmond is nonsense.Even if open source software were technically better, which in the case of Linux is highly debatable, a product with wider acceptance is more important to corporate users. People running mission-critical applications in heterogeneous environments buy products which are based on standards and will integrate well with their existing products; which will scale well and support a larger user base; which are reliable and for which there is a high level of skills available to provide support.The main problem with Linux is just that people do modify it There is no standard version. The main benefits touted by Ms Pascoe for using open source software appear to be that it is a Bill Gates-free desktop; that the “guys from Redmond” won’t get their “bounty”; that Microsoft is operating a monopoly from which only cyber-heroes such as the comic-reading ex-hacker, Jamie Zovinsky, and other “legends” can save us.
This all misses the point. There is a certain cachet in using a product which is non-mainstream. You become the new techno-warrior, and not some Redmond clone. Proponents of the Linux operating system (and for that matter Apple Mac users) seem to be almost fanatical in their devotion.

Sir: The main thrust of Eva Pascoe’s article about open source software (Network, 14 December) appears to be a sort of anti-Microsoft crusade. If he survives a Senate trial, many will believe he has been allowed to mock the constitution he is charged to uphold.Unlikely that it is, Mr Clinton should go quietly before he inflicts further damage on his country, and allows Saddam the last, hollow laugh.The Sunday Times. forget that America’s authority in the world depends on more than its physical strength. The integrity of the man in the Oval Office matters as much, and Mr Clinton has been found wanting. It is about America’s chief law enforcement officer solemnly swearing to protect the country’s system of law – then lying before a Federal Grand Jury and obstructing justice.The Mail on SundayMANY PEOPLE… Most [ordinary Americans] think he is doing a good job – and that far outweighs his affair with a young woman in the White House.Sunday MirrorTHOSE WHO still seek to defend [Clinton] on the grounds that he should not have been impeached because of hanky-panky with an employee young enough to be his daughter totally miss the point. He has faced a trial rigged on party lines by right-wingers determined to drive him out of the presidency.

It is time to show Bill the door, and say hello to Gore.News of the WorldTHE CRUDE Republican attempt to kick Mr Clinton out of office is particularly outrageous at this time of international crisis. The Republican Speaker-elect, Bob Livingston, showed him the way to go when he resigned from the House of Representatives [over] his extra-marital affair. American voters have made their views clear on this – they want neither resignation nor impeachment. Unless and until that changes, Clinton should stay on.
The ObserverCLINTON HAS lost the credibility he might have earned for other aspects of his presidency and is no longer fit to lead the Western world. IN THE end, the issue is about the constitutional implications of resignation, and whether it is warranted by the seriousness of [Clinton's] offence. It was the after effects which hastened his death this month, and shortened his first real retirement.

He was appointed KCVO when he left Westminster in 1995, and the Catholic Church recognised his life’s work with a papal knighthood in the Order of Pope Pius IX.William Richard Scott Thomas, naval officer: born 22 March 1932; OBE 1974; Directorate of Naval Plans, MoD 1974-77; CO HMS Fearless 1977-78; Director, Office Appointments (Seamen) 1980-83; Naval Secretary 1983-85; Flag Officer Second Flotilla 1985-87; KCB 1987; Deputy, Saclant 1987-89; UK Military Representative to Nato 1989-92; Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod, and Serjeant-at-Arms, House of Lords, and Secretary to the Lord Great Chamberlain 1992-95; KCVO 1995; married 1959 Paddy Cullinan (two sons, four daughters, and two sons deceased); died 13 December 1998.. He had a stroke in 1993, which left him with something of a limp, but his mind and sense of humour were unimpaired, and when he returned to work his devotion to duty was an example of self-discipline much admired. The duties have extended since the 16th century, and now a staff of 80 deals with all administrative work in the House of Lords.Richard Thomas was well suited to lead such a team, and in his tenure proceedings were modified and modernised. All these offices he delighted in, though relieved that the second was more ceremonial than disciplinarian.