It started innocently. I started using a free/open-source web browser, then called Phoenix (now Firefox). It seemed to me to be faster, easier, and generally better than Internet Explorer on my Windows XP powered laptop. Soon after, having been unhappy with the performance of Microsoft Outlook with my large volume of archived mail and unwilling to pay for or pirate the promising new (2003) version, I switched from Microsoft’s Outlook to the Mozilla Thunderbird mail application.
Soon after, I made the switch from Trillian to the free/open-source instant messaging client, Gaim. It then dawned on me that the three applications I use most, my web browser, email client, and instant messaging client, were all free/open-source software. Not only were these applications free software, they are also available across multiple platforms (Windows, Linux, and some for Mac OS X).
Armed with the realization that I was close to platform independence, I intentionally sought to weed out the few remaining Windows-only applications in my arsenal. I made the switch from Microsoft Office to OpenOffice.org. This left some games, and Photoshop/Illustrator as the last key proprietary/closed-souce applications in my regular use.
Driven primarily by curiosity and technical/professional interest (particularly in alternative user-interface design), I decided to exercise my newfound platform/operating-system independence and switch my primary laptop to Linux. This was over a year ago and I’ve been relatively happy, given some challenges, since.
All along, these decisions and similar decisions at the company-level where I work were pragmatic. Open-source software is good, but it’s really about using the best tool for the job, be it free/open or proprietary. While the free/open systems were generally beating out the proprietary systems, the decisions were still driven primarily by a (relatively) qualitative comparison of features/quality, rather than any philosophical best about licensing.
I had always been turned off by Microsoft-hating Linux-zealots that play into my stereotype like a bad gay sitcom character. Microsoft has many problems, but they also develop some remarkably good software (I’m a fan of the Office suite and love Microsoft Streets and Trips). What bothered me more than the last-computer-conference-I-was-at-Tshirt attire was the fundamental belief that free/open-source software was better than proprietary alternatives.
However, having lived in a mostly free/open-source software environment for over a year now, I am starting to drink the kool-aid.
I had been running Mac OS X on a old iMac for browser testing purposes and following the development of OS X for a while too. It dawned on me that one of the primary reasons keeping from using OS X as my primary operating system (in addition to not wanting to replace my working hardware), was due the licensing, control, and ownership of the software and platform.
Mac OS X, since it is built largely upon open-source components and protocols, carries with it many of the pragmatic benefits of open-source software. However, since a significant amount of the Mac OS X system is not free/open-source, you do not have all of the freedom you would have on a completely free/open-source system. You are, in the long term, still at the whim of a private corporation (Apple Computer).
To many people, quite understandably, this will not matter – especially since Apple is producing some great software lately. That’s fine with me. I’m not at a point where where I want to force everyone to use free/open-source software. The idea of forcing something in the name of “freedom” just doesn’t sit well with me.
That said, I am starting to think that governments and other public institutions might have some kind of moral and ethical (though not, at this point, legal) obligation to share software it develops or has developed on its behalf.
While I’m not about to start burning the Windows XP license that came with my laptop in the street, I’m starting to take into account licensing and freedom to use and control software in the decisions and recommendations I make for myself and those around me.
Apple is part of the same supply-and-demand relationship like all of us. They Q&A process is worth the price for commercial software.
Good point, Gabriel. Yes, quality assurance can be worth paying for and Apple seems to be doing a good job. However, I think that is an independent issue from freedom, ownership, and control of code and of a platform.
For example, I can choose to pay RedHat or Novell for they quality assurance.
Licencing wasn’t really a factor for me until just recently, when I thought about buying a game. However, as part of the purchase, one would be forced into servitude of a very draconian protection system, one they called steam. The name’s appropriate, because with it, they (valve) can burn their customers at a whim. It will be a scary place to use proprietary software when steam like systems become common place, in all sorts of apps.
I am a big fan of open-source software as well – with Firefox, Gaim, and OpenOffice.org being my most used apps.
What I have not been able to find is a good mp3 player that is also open source. I’ve been using both Winamp and iTunes for a while now on my Windows machine, and am now looking for alternatives. Any suggestions?
M.G. Are you kidding? Valve’s Steam model is to free game manufacturers from the grasp of distributers. Steam doesn’t take your firstborn or require you to sign a printed out pdf licence in blood…
The measures that are in place are just to stop illigal activity and resemble the HL1/cs1 measures a lot. Just one single sign on to steam, just once, will allow you to play the game (hl2) forever and ever amen.
Would you rather have lot’s of people cracking the game, using cheats to gain advantage in multiplayer whilest you and me pay for it and find our multiplayer game wrecked because the playingfield isn’t level?
“The idea of forcing something in the name of “freedom” just doesn’t sit well with me.”
Steven, be aware that you can’t guarantee any freedom without force. Eg freedom from violence must be backed up with the rule of law. Freedom of speech means the govt is forced not to censor. Ending slavery means slave owners are forced not to enslave. Extending copyright means forcing people to stop distributing the covered works.
You can’t have one without the other: any particular freedom for one entity is by definition a restriction on another entity.
So, you don’t really oppose “only free software for all” on those grounds. That would mean you oppose all human and civil rights, and are an anarchist ( the real kind, rather than the “I love black make-up” kind).
You oppose it because of something else. Maybe : “Where will all the games come from?” or more likely ” I can’t think of an enforcement system that is equitable, and doesn’t cause more problems than it solves, so for now I’ll assume there isn’t one.” I agree with you if its the last one 😉 Read Locke, he’s good.
I’m the one that use Miranda Im? (http://www.miranda-im.org)
i think it’s better than Gaim..
Unfortunately, it’s avaible only for windows platforms..but
since it’s open source i hope some people make it avaible on Linux&MacOSX sooner or later..
You say “governments and other public institutions might have some kind of moral and ethical (though not, at this point, legal) obligation to share software it develops” and also mention MS S&T – a mapping product.
Use the US Geological Survey as the government model for your concept; there’s tons of map-type data available through them, including TerraServer data. All that data is not only available to us, it’s free or almost free. Compared to the UK’s Ordnance Survey (and everyone else too it seems), they’re far ahead of the curve.
Try out USAPhotoMaps for a freebie example of TerraServer (US aerial photo & topo map) data. It also works with GPS – another US government benefit to the globe. Speaking of the globe, try out NASA’a World Wind app for a global integration of all sorts of data. Amazing stuff, really.
Riccardo:
really, miranda im is pretty good, and it’s much faster then gaim, but, imho, gaim is better. also, open source does not guarenteee cross platform. (look at dillo. it uses so many linux libs that a windows version would be a total rewrite.)
it’s hard to beat gtk for both speed and cross platfrom compatability.
rjw,
I believe you’re taking Steven’s words too literally.
When he says The idea of forcing something in the name of “freedom” just doesn’t sit well with me, I think what he means is that he’s not comfortable telling someone “I know what’s best for you, and that is to be free from the constraints associated with proprietary software, so you will use this open/freeware instead.”
I have read Locke and I think he would have felt the same way: That would be more than “restriction on an entity”, it would be oppression, which is the very thing Locke objected to, and which, I assume, is why Steven put the word freedom in quotation marks.
And (since this is not a philosophy forum) I agree with Riccardo — I prefer Miranda to Gaim as well. I wanted a light-weight, hasstle-free app to replace MSN Messenger, and Gaim can seem awfully clunky and confusing at times. Fortunately I’m a Windows user, so I can’t comment on the cross-platform advantages.
Dalibor :
Assuming you’re usingf a Windows platform I suggest you to use Foobar http://www.foobar2000.org/ for any of you digital audio content playback. you can download a Software Development Kit as well.
Enjoy. ^_^
This post makes a lot of sense to me because I’m now in the way of switching to Linux. I’m glad to find people like you whose comments motivate me to make this vital change! 😉
“They [sic] Q&A process is worth the price for commercial software.”
As someone who has worked for a number of the larger shrink-wrap software companies, I can tell you that the statement above is, at best, idealistic.
Commercial vendors are under enormous pressure to deliver on a schedule. Since the public doesn’t generally respond well to the “remove features to reduce development time” axiom, the testing phase is always (bar none) the area where cuts take place. Add to that a lack of experienced (or well-paid) quality assurance personnel and you end up with things like Windows.
The first time I saw the list of active bugs for one particular company’s product I couldn’t believe my eyes — I couldn’t believe the product was shippable. The package was sent to manufacturing with over 1200 “critical” bugs (as in major security problems, flat-out crashes, or data-corrupting problems). And those were the _known_ bugs for mid-sized application. The mentality of shoving software out the door and patching it later is much more prevalent than you might think.
I can buy the argument that Linux isn’t quite ready for the desktop, but assuming that paying for software results in better performance is downright silly. 🙂
I am currently sitting on the fence, burned CDs in hand, wanting to switch to Mandrake 10.1 PPC but a little scared of what it’s going to be like as a full-time general purpose and development box. I’ve been using Mac OS X since it first came out, and OS 8 + 9 before that, so I am quite familiar with Mac and their user interface/features.
I am an intermediate-advanced OS X user and pretty comfortable with the terminal window although not to the level of the group I am seeing above.
Is it possible to use Linux OS and not know *nix really well? Am I going to get stuck at some point and not know how to get back out? These are the questions racing through my very curious lil’ mind…I need to make sure the computer is always still usable for my family who is into web browsing, email, IM and word processing programs.
geof
Geof: Any time you switch operating systems there are going to be some growing pains. Gnome and the like are not quite as polished as OS X. Having said that, the ‘concept’ of things should be familiar. Once you get past the differences, things should fall into place pretty quickly.