They *really* need to work on their advertising.... Did anyone else know about this beforehand ?
-----Original Message----- From: Rik Tindall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, 30 August 2004 1:30 p.m. To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; CLUG (E-mail) Subject: [Fwd: Tomorrow is the day!] SFD material v.useable -------- Original Message -------- From: - Sat Aug 28 08:59:56 2004 X-UIDL: UID2020-1091138711 X-Mozilla-Status: 1001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from jozlin.snap.net.nz (jozlin.snap.net.nz [202.37.101.35]) by kelso.snap.net.nz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91B4368CD2 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Sat, 28 Aug 2004 04:00:51 +1200 (NZST) Received: from sf-day.org ([209.133.47.250]) by jozlin.snap.net.nz with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1C0j9n-00049c-00 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Sat, 28 Aug 2004 04:00:51 +1200 Received: from smtp.nildram.co.uk (smtp.nildram.co.uk [195.112.4.54]) by sf-day.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i7RFu3r25280; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 09:56:06 -0600 Received: from [10.0.0.2] (henrik.gotadsl.co.uk [82.133.122.11]) by smtp.nildram.co.uk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69B1C24DA14; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 16:56:48 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 16:57:25 +0100 From: Henrik Nilsen Omma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7 (Windows/20040616) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Software Freedom Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Tomorrow is the day! Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by sf-day.org id i7RFu3r25280 more for the cause.. harder work next year? - Rik ---------------------- Free and Open Source Software: Time to Spread the Word By Henrik Omma and Jules Siedenburg 'Free' or 'open source' computer software is distinct from 'proprietary' software produced and licensed by companies such as Microsoft or Adobe. For instance, MS-Word is a wordprocessing programme produced by Microsoft, but wordprocessing can also be performed using open source alternatives. Such software is developed by a worldwide community of IT enthusiasts, many of whom donate their time to this endeavour. Motivating ideals include ensuring widespread access to quality, low-cost software and freedom from corporate or government control, although free and open source software (FOSS) also presents opportunities for profitable enterprise. The resulting software is available free of charge on the internet or for the price of a good cup of coffee as a CD-ROM. By contrast, proprietary software tends to be expensive and must be purchased for each machine then upgraded every few years if compatibility with other computers is to be maintained, i.e., if users wish to be able to open documents generated with newer versions of the software. Thus, even where proprietary software is initially distributed at concessionary terms, users may find themselves 'locked in' to a system whereby they are obliged to pay dearly every few years for necessary upgrades. Although FOSS offers diverse advantages over proprietary software, perhaps the principal reason why this software may be of interest to prospective users is its low cost. Yet no matter how inexpensive or effective FOSS may be, it would arguably not represent a viable alternative for end users if it were not fully compatible with the dominant existing software, notably the diverse Microsoft products. Happily, the best available open source programmes are not only comparable to such products in terms of performance and reliability, but are also fully compatible with them. Thus, if an FOSS user receives a document generated in Microsoft Word, Power Point or Photoshop, he will be able open it, make changes return it to the sender, who will in turn be able to open and use the altered document on his system. One popular FOSS programme is OpenOffice, a multi-faceted application programme comparable to MS-Office or Lotus SmartSuite. The Mozilla web browser has also received considerable attention recently in the IT press, as it has consistently proven itself to be more efficient and secure than Internet Explorer. Similarly, Linux is often seen as a more effective operating system than Windows. Such software may well represent the future of IT, and enjoys the backing of key players in the IT industry such as Sun Microsystems, IBM, Hewlett Packard and Apple. Already most readers will be using diverse FOSS applications, since much of the internet, including Google, is powered by products such as Linux, BSD, and Apache. Such proven products provide a way for the public sector, businesses and individuals to reduce costs and safeguard future access to data with secure alternatives. Such solutions are particularly relevant in the developing world, since their efficiency means they ca n run on older, less powerful hardware. Users may employ FOSS programmes as they see fit, including commercially, and may re-distribute them to others. Those with programming skills may examine and alter a programme's design, or source code, for their own use. Open source code does not mean that the programme is open to intruders or that data is left exposed, but rather the opposite. When the inner workings of the software are secret, there is no way for the end user to know how his information is managed and who may have access to it. By contrast, with open source each step in the process can be freely observed. Such transparent treatment of information is especially important to governmental functions such as electronic voting. Notably, it would allow private citizens and election monitors to oversee the entire election process, which would not be possible with proprietary software. There is currently little knowledge about FOSS amongst the general public, and much disinformation. Recent press coverage has been disappointing, with spurious connections being made between Linux programmers and virus writers, reflecting a clear lack of knowledge in the mainstream press. Similarly, FOSS is sometimes conflated with the Linux operating system, making it seem misleadingly narrow. Yet it is naive to expect journalists to write balanced articles when they receive one-sided input. Major companies like Microsoft have professional PR machines that churn out well-written material and are adept at exploiting publication channels, and journalists are more likely to read MS press releases than FOSS sources like Slashdot or NewsForge. After all, the journalist's task is greatly facilitated if they can work from polished sources, and corporate PR teams are well aware of this. As seen recently in the UK pilot study on FOSS conducted by Newham Council in London (FT, 17 August, 2004), Microsoft often pays to produce research reports of questionable objectivity whose findings end up as newspaper headlines. In the case of Newham Council, their research predicted greater cost savings from sticking with Microsoft products than from switching to FOSS, citing anticipated improvements to the former. Such reports also typically spread 'FUD' (fear, uncertainty and doubt) about FOSS products, as exemplified by the Newham report warning darkly of problems with security, compatibility and lower productivity if the council adopted FOSS. By contrast, Microsoft advertisements paint a rosy future where its products seamlessly meet emerging needs, featuring images such as happy children or CEOs recounting their successes with new technologies. Doubts about in-house research nonetheless remain, and similar reassessments of existing software arrangements are inevitable given persistent concerns about costs and agressive business practices. Such concerns notwithstanding, the real challenges lie on the horizon. New lock-in technologies like WinFS and Palladium promise to undermine interoperability, while legal instruments such as broad software patents have the potential to stop FOSS in its tracks. Today users can import MS-Office documents to OpenOffice and export them again with a high level of compatibility. But what happens if such reverse engineering becomes illegal due to a patented file format? Software producers such as Microsoft would doubtless make filters available to major companies like Adobe in order to keep their customers happy and the anti-trust watchdogs at bay. However, these filters would most likely be provided for a fee as pre-compiled libraries, and may have licenses that explicitly prohibit their use in open source programmes. Such factors could mean that FOSS applications are unable to deal with proprietary files. Specifically, FOSS users could be barred from these libraries, while patents could prevent FOSS developers from creating alternative versions. More worrisome still, users' data could be stored in a single SQL database under WinFS and protected by a patent, which would effectively mean that Linux-based systems were no longer able to read or write to Windows machines, rendering Linux useless on personal computers in many people's eyes. Such threats can only be successfully combated by raising awareness of these issues amongst the general public. The best hope of retaining and building upon the promise of FOSS lies in people growing accustomed to the concept of FOSS and beginning to demand it in the same way they demand democracy and free speech. Only in this way can users be certain that politicians and corporations will listen. In the case of both voters and consumers, numbers really do count. Against this backdrop, a global celebration of FOSS called Software Freedom Day has been organised. This effort has involved inviting volunteers from around the world to participate in a celebration of FOSS, to be held on August 28th this year and on the last Saturday in August in future years. This event will involve teams comprised of FOSS enthusiasts from over thirty countries across the world, from Albania and Australia to Viet Nam and Zimbabwe. Each team will set up a stand in a public place to distribute printed information and pressed CD-ROMs with selected high quality, user-friendly FOSS. Some teams will have computers available for demonstration, while others will arrange public speeches. The days and weeks preceding Software Freedom Day may be used to inform the media about planned events and to publicise them via fliers, posters or other means. Software Freedom Day (http://www.softwarefreedomday.org/) focuses on publicising and distributing two particularly promising and user-friendly FOSS products, namely TheOpenCD and a Linux Live CD based on Knoppix software. The defining characteristic of these compilations is that they provide only the best available FOSS, certified by a recognised expert and supported by the Open Source Initiative. This is important, since the informal nature of FOSS development means that it may be difficult to distinguish quality, user-ready software from that which is still being developed or simply poor. With these products, by contrast, users are assured of quality and reliability, similarly to when they buy MS-Office. Moreover, users can trust that the software on TheOpenCD runs on Windows and is fully compatible with established proprietary software. As such, TheOpenCD provides a vehicle for FOSS to be adopted by people who perceive Linux as excessively challenging and wish to continue using the Windows operating system. The Linux Live CD, meanwhile, provides a user-friendly introduction to a software suite consisting purely of FOSS. Mr. Omma leads TheOpenCD initiative and Dr. Siedenburg is an Oxford University research associate.
