On 7/17/06, Rogelio Serrano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
its not about making software a free commodity. thats called "Free Software" a different animal all together. Open source doesn't just mean access to the source code. The distribution terms of open-source software must comply with the following criteria:
a. freely redistributable
b. source code is included even if the program is compiled
c. it must allow derived works
d. it ensures the integrity of the author(s)
e. no discrimination on persons and groups, and even endeavors
f. it must have a license that is applied to all, to whom the program is redistributed to
g. it doesn't have a product limiting license.
h. it doesn't restrict other software that goes along with the software being distributed
i. the license must be technology neutral
you can refer to www.opensource.org for the definition
no one can make writing software for free, its not a very good business model. linux isn't "free". you me and billions of people can certainly download it. we can maintain our own versions of linux. certainly but you me and members of plug have one advantage: we know linux so our cost of acquistion isn't as high. people--- normal people will need training to use even the simplest thing, although in my opinon they just need to read to figure things out... that a different thing all together. training will cost money. the cost of installing across multiple networks cost money. the cost of defending and maintaining a network of computers whether they are linux or not is high. heheh. so its not "free" it can never be free.
linux is the most successful open source project in the world. it is so because the hackers runnning the show have a particular use for their particular development focus. people will submit patch for a network device--- a nic because their desktop uses that nic and the company that probably made it hasn't written a driver for it.
just go to sourceforge.net and you'll find hundreds of projects that haven' gone off the ground--- not because there isn't any use for them, the authors have lost interest. how many unmaintained parts of the linux kernel are there? wasn't there talk in the kernel forums about spending a release cycle just to remove the unmaintained code? or code that no one uses anymore? just to clean up the kernel?
and for you and me, we have the skills and inclination to prefer to tweak the system and make it work for us. thats engineer talk and its fine with us right? but you know what? normal people don't care about such things. they just need the thing to work.
those things are normal everyday stuff. but there are some apps out there that the commercial versions are much better. photoshop over gimp? photoshop. linux cluster? well we probabaly can write our own for that. climate modeling software? tall order, it would be nice to have an open source software out there but i guess the climate modeling community have their own internal stuff for that that they write.
code to launch say... a long range missile or to destroy one or to intercept one.... would you want that open sourced? i'd feel safe knowing people who really know that kind of stuff and who will use it for the right thing have it.
i know this is PLUG, my apologies to the members, but maybe he should have considered a Mac? i use my mac with open source tools--- open office, gimp, programming tools (python ruby gcc etc) and etc. heck i have a webserver running off it. i have parallels that runs gentoo and ubuntu linux on os x. and i love my mac. its unix. or may be one of the good user friendly linux distros like OpenSuse. a Mac equiped the way a poweruser in the PC world would want is only 10% to 15% higher than a PC of roughly the same make and its totally worth it for the craftmanship that goes into the product. and he won't be pissed because Office runs perfectly on a Mac, but seriously... isn't OpenOffice enough for everybody? maybe he can give Keynote and Pages a try... more bang for the buck than MS Office if you ask me.
maybe you can train your dad on the beauty of Open Source. that way he won't care about expiring licenses. :)
just my piso's worth.
cheers
cocoy
On 7/17/06, Cocoy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 1. i guess we can all agree on this: that legislation that mandates "open
> source" isn't really that wise.
> because:
No i disagree.
> a) "open source" is a methodology, a way of building software
Its really about making software a free commodity. Its about allowing
people to pay for hardware and get software for free. If everybody had
a foundry nobody will be buying hammers right? Now if you sell hammers
thats not good for you.
Of course a foundry costs a lot thats why people buy hammers from
stores. That different for open source software. Everybody can "afford
the foundry" so to speak. Everybody meaning people who knows how to
"operate the foundry".
its not about making software a free commodity. thats called "Free Software" a different animal all together. Open source doesn't just mean access to the source code. The distribution terms of open-source software must comply with the following criteria:
a. freely redistributable
b. source code is included even if the program is compiled
c. it must allow derived works
d. it ensures the integrity of the author(s)
e. no discrimination on persons and groups, and even endeavors
f. it must have a license that is applied to all, to whom the program is redistributed to
g. it doesn't have a product limiting license.
h. it doesn't restrict other software that goes along with the software being distributed
i. the license must be technology neutral
you can refer to www.opensource.org for the definition
no one can make writing software for free, its not a very good business model. linux isn't "free". you me and billions of people can certainly download it. we can maintain our own versions of linux. certainly but you me and members of plug have one advantage: we know linux so our cost of acquistion isn't as high. people--- normal people will need training to use even the simplest thing, although in my opinon they just need to read to figure things out... that a different thing all together. training will cost money. the cost of installing across multiple networks cost money. the cost of defending and maintaining a network of computers whether they are linux or not is high. heheh. so its not "free" it can never be free.
> b) a key ingredient for a successful open source project is a community of
> developers who believe in that particular project, who have an interest in
> its use/development
Its really about allowing people to use the software any way they
liked. Not the way the vendor wanted them to use it. If we restrict
open source development to vendors not the users then whats the
difference? Even you can read the source code its illegal to make
changes. Thats not good.
linux is the most successful open source project in the world. it is so because the hackers runnning the show have a particular use for their particular development focus. people will submit patch for a network device--- a nic because their desktop uses that nic and the company that probably made it hasn't written a driver for it.
just go to sourceforge.net and you'll find hundreds of projects that haven' gone off the ground--- not because there isn't any use for them, the authors have lost interest. how many unmaintained parts of the linux kernel are there? wasn't there talk in the kernel forums about spending a release cycle just to remove the unmaintained code? or code that no one uses anymore? just to clean up the kernel?
and for you and me, we have the skills and inclination to prefer to tweak the system and make it work for us. thats engineer talk and its fine with us right? but you know what? normal people don't care about such things. they just need the thing to work.
> c) for all the good things open source method can do, it is not the answer
> for every software development there is and that said,
> d) it should be market forces that must determine the tools of the trade.
>
I totally disagree. I wrote a simple spreadsheet engine this morning.
I wrote a new SMTP server last week. I might write a replacement for
my non wimp gui next week. Whatever is needed. I don't even consider
if i'm buying from a vendor. Its slow, its a lot of paperwork, most
probably not meet my needs and expensive.
those things are normal everyday stuff. but there are some apps out there that the commercial versions are much better. photoshop over gimp? photoshop. linux cluster? well we probabaly can write our own for that. climate modeling software? tall order, it would be nice to have an open source software out there but i guess the climate modeling community have their own internal stuff for that that they write.
code to launch say... a long range missile or to destroy one or to intercept one.... would you want that open sourced? i'd feel safe knowing people who really know that kind of stuff and who will use it for the right thing have it.
> 2. a "resolution"--- may be of greater use: Congress recognizes that
> Software, created on a level playing field such as what "Open Source" offers
> many great benefits to the Filipino people and advocates its use. And what
> great proof than a move by Congress to use Open Source software in its daily
> affairs? The PR value would be huge--- a blow to M$ and a big win for OSS.
> heck, it might just work in a land of pirated software to go open. just be
> prepared for a pissed off microsoft.
>
So what if M$ is pissed. just shows M$ has power over Filipinos. When
Bill Gates says bend over we all bend over.
My father was pissed because he needs to replace his 2 year old pc
because likes to use vista. I told him that if Bill gates says update,
you better. If bill gates says jump you jump or someone else will land
on your toes.
He will be even more pissed when his ms office 2007 beta expires.
i know this is PLUG, my apologies to the members, but maybe he should have considered a Mac? i use my mac with open source tools--- open office, gimp, programming tools (python ruby gcc etc) and etc. heck i have a webserver running off it. i have parallels that runs gentoo and ubuntu linux on os x. and i love my mac. its unix. or may be one of the good user friendly linux distros like OpenSuse. a Mac equiped the way a poweruser in the PC world would want is only 10% to 15% higher than a PC of roughly the same make and its totally worth it for the craftmanship that goes into the product. and he won't be pissed because Office runs perfectly on a Mac, but seriously... isn't OpenOffice enough for everybody? maybe he can give Keynote and Pages a try... more bang for the buck than MS Office if you ask me.
maybe you can train your dad on the beauty of Open Source. that way he won't care about expiring licenses. :)
just my piso's worth.
cheers
cocoy
--
things i hate about my linux pc:
1. it takes more than a second to boot up
2. keeps asking about filenames and directories
3. does not remember what i was working on yesterday
4. does not remember all the changes i have ever made
5.cannot figure out necessary settings by itself
_________________________________________________
Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List
[email protected] (#PLUG @ irc.free.net.ph)
Read the Guidelines: http://linux.org.ph/lists
Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph
--
Arrakis teaches the attitude of the knife — chopping off what's incomplete and saying: "Now it's complete because it's ended here." from Collected Sayings of Muad'Dib by the Princess Irulan
blog (politics): http://arkangel1a.blogspot.com/
blog (tech): http://penguinstuff.blogspot.com
_________________________________________________ Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List [email protected] (#PLUG @ irc.free.net.ph) Read the Guidelines: http://linux.org.ph/lists Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph
