Slashdot Mirror
Can Linux Beat Microsoft in Education?
Booker asks: "Microsoft has been the driving force behind the Schools Interoperability Framework (SIF), a system by which education-related applications can communicate with each other via XML messages. Although Microsoft is the coordinator, the spec seems extremely open, and something that Linux applications could easily work with. Many vendors have signed on to the SIF, and it looks like it will become a standard, at least in North America. What do you think? Could Linux stake a claim as a server for this new standard? What would it take to port this code?" This would be cool. Anyone interested in tackling this one?
"One of the things Microsoft has done to support this standard is to release a Zone Integration Server which manages the queuing and authentication between the various client applications attached to it. The interesting thing, though, is that the source code is available, and the license is quite liberal - liberal enough, I think, that a Linux port would be possible.
in the head, att close range...
"Can Linux beat Microsoft in Edication?" I believe that's a lot of bullshit. Microsoft has been there way before Linux was. And that is my point. Thank you.
Well, a lot of good open source projects have commercial vendors who can 'wrap' a solid business model and support around a product. I'm thinking in particular of some GPL'ed perl-based shopping cart system I put into a site, but even redhat and other general linux companies could provide the business doings and cred neccessary to go for contracts. dingus
I didn't say Linux sucked.. I said you suck Fucking idiots can't even read..
Yeah, but you could be putting access and control of the entire grading/class schedule system in the control of a socially unstable kid (been there). Doesn't seem like something even a progressive school would do twice.
The entire product would have to be robust enough for relatively untechy people to use and admin; schools don't really want to pay a lot to keep up low-traffic systems.
dingus
You need to have an Objective-C port that runs on MacOSX too.
Problem is Apple will need Objective C, Webobjects or Java ports to run SIF on its OSX servers. Schools will be spending scads of dough on getting the proper Apple solution. MS did this so their platform wouldn't be locked out and made it open source so no one could compete as well with NT. Quite devious.
The licence does not permit use of Zone Integration Server outside 'education use'. If you are not using it in school, YOU ARE BREAKING THE LAW!!!
NT can be setup like that.
idiot.
A Biscuit Integration Server!
I heard that the BS was quite poorly written and still an alpha piece of software.
This would help schools all over the world communicate by sending BML messages.(BiscuitMarkupLanguage)
BML is not an ANSI standard sorry pal.
Have you tried Powdermilk Biscuits?
My, they're tasty, and expeditious...
I have never known biscuits to be especially tasty nor efficient in any manner.
thank you.
No thank you.
Like always, Microsoft will just change the standard and add proprietary extensions to keep Linux and Solaris et al from competing. SIF is in its nacent stages anyway.
Shadowcaster - wishing he would get more karma for this post. :(
Apple is still the #1 vendor in the educational market. The latest sales statistics show that Apple still has the largst market share in the edu world, and still has the largest installed base. You will have to work long and hard to dethrone Apple. Or maybe you should join forces, since Apple is about to ship a true BSD Unix product.
Most people are sheep. Monkeys are far more "free" thinking.
The system requirments required are quite steep. First off, there are few processors available with biscuit-aware micro code. The most popular by far is extremely fast amd is known as BisQuick. Check it out at www.bisquick.com. Quite an exciting technology.
At UMBC, the school I went to, lab workstation are dual boot NT 4.0 and RedHat.
Whoever moderated this post down should be shot.
NO WONDER HE HAS SO MUCH GAS!
The key difference between this license and GPL is that this license says it's for educational purposes only. Of course, that seems to contradict the beginning of the license, which says that "[t]he act of running the Program is not restricted." Of course, IANAL.
It worked for me. I'm using Netscape 4.7 on Windows right now (because I'm at home over spring break). I mirrored the license at http://128.210.58.90/zis/eula.html if anyone has trouble with the MS site.
Huh? If that system had been running a more secure OS (like Linux) the end users wouldn't have been able to 'futz' with it and 'break it'.
HELL, NT should even be able to be set up better than that.
no, it cannot. it won't even beat a hot bowl of grtis poured down my pants. thank you.
Listen here, Jefus J Crest is the man, and John Shaft is his body guard. Don't let your mouth get your ass in trouble.
damn. i wish the school i went to had a third of that shit. right there baby
Two. One to lift me, and one to read aloud from
the "Trolls and Packet Monkeys for Dummies" book
while doing it.
The license link gives me:
TO BUY A NEW CAR WOULD MAKE YOU SEXUALLY ATTRACTIVE.
i think its very important for younger students to learn UNIX, wether is be Linux or Solaris or any other platform. Many if not most colleges and universities run primarily UNIX and Macintosh's. Having a prior knowledge of these environments would accelerate the average students' learning capabilities and help them become less windowz reliant.
most systems (if not all ) in the science and health professions are already running UNIX based shells. excluding MIT and Harvard, take smaller more prominent universities like Carneigie Mellon and Duquesne University (both in pittsburgh) for example. other than the use of NT in computer labs for the students to work on projects with... all of the quantitative and qualitative analysi are done with UNIX, SGI, or SPARC. its just the path for the future. as our society becomes more scientificly centered, the use of these machines increases. prior knowledge of these machines would make or break a job employment oppertunity (less training, more money saved).
its a great idea... just as long microsoft doesnt go and change the standard to fit their lazy needs
It's true that there is a wide range of ability in teachers who work with computers and that the bottom of that range is very low. One of the reasons that Macs work well in schools is that they have a peculiar kind of "stability" (no flames, please) that works well for schools. Although they crash easily, they can usually be fixed with a simple reboot. Harder problems can usually be fixed by running Norton Utilities. Plus, you can beat the Hell out of them and they still keep limping along. They may not run well, but they do run. For all these reasons, Macs are good in an environment where you have ignorant users and administrators. I'm not a *nix guy by any stretch of the imagination, so I have to ask you folks a question. Granting that Linux (or whatever flavor) will probably only crash very infrequently, what are the odds that fixing it when it *does* crash can be done by any random idiot (e.g., via a reboot)? If the answer is "not very high," then I think you folks have some more work to do before you can really sell to schools. If, on the other hand, the answer is "pretty good," then I think linux has a shot.
The school I went to was strictly a dos dominated enviroment, but then, this was a CAD class rather then an actual computer class. Though there were a few unix stations at that time, linux wasn't an option (showing my age) till a couple years later. I'd be interested in seeing if its become more open or if the unix stations have been tossed out or not.
looks like middleware to me.
Deleted
Just thought I'd point this out though I'm replying to myself.
Deleted
Microsoft know it. They are positioning themselves to be the broker for every electronic inter business transaction.
Middleware is going to be acting as the central nervous system of businesses. MS want that central nervous system running on MSMQ on W2K.
It's going to be like MS owning the TCP/IP protocol. The world needs a completely free, open, cross platform message oriented middleware system which uses open standards like those being created by Rosettanet.
At the moment, all the various middleware systems are incompatible. It's the same as the situation we had with all of the networking protocols before TCP/IP.
http://www.internet2.edu/middleware/
http://www.rosettanet.org/
Deleted
I'm not going to tell you specifically what you need to do, everyone's requirements are unique. Instead, here are some links on middleware:
m l
http://www.sei.cmu.edu/str/descriptions/momt.ht
http://www.internet2.edu/middleware/
http://www.moma-inc.org/
http://www.xmlBlaster.org/
Deleted
I've hacked together a system which uses INN as a sort of cheapo message oriented middleware server. Works quite well. It's pretty much what INN was designed for anyway.
It's basically INN with newsgroups acting as the queues. You have to do a little coding on the client side for posting/reading and loading/unloading the data, I used Perl and shell scripts for that but it isn't difficult.
Lets see, it's been a while... unload, compress, mimencode, encrypt, digitally sign and post. Cron job running every minute to read/post messages.
I don't use XML as the message format, it's just delimited ascii files but that's only because I haven't got round to it.
Deleted
I've done this with INN. It's in an earlier post.
Deleted
I looked into the SIF when it was first announced months ago. We went over the license on Technocrat, and quickly realized that it wasn't open source at all.
When you look at how MS intends the ZIS to be used, the end-user software that anyone but the techies see isn't intended to write or read data natively in the SIF format. There are agents to translate from the proprietary data formats to/from SIF. After things get through the agents into SIF form they get processed by the ZIS.
So why bother with SIF at all? The agents are clearly where the important work is to be done. If we want to do something similar, why bother with porting some MS code and be limited by their license? We already have an XML spec called EduML that does pretty much the same thing. There are OSS educational programs being written to use EduML as their native data format. If we were to use something like the Casbah Project as the backend, all we'd need to do is write a little glue and agents for whatever non-EduML software we wanted to play with our efforts. And it would all be OSS.
If you're at all interested in this sort of thing, come take a look at SEUL/edu and help us get Linux and OSS more widely accepted and used in education!
Doug Loss
I'm a teacher and LK has things right. Here in Rhode Island, we have a program called Teachers and Technology and, even though this program provided each teacher who participated with a laptop and two weeks of training, most teachers shun any thought of technology. I work in a middle school running a network of imacs and powermacs. The network has no log in, no security, no nothing. Turn on the machine and, if you like, reformat the hard drive! Easy. Getting people at school to think about anything new (let alone new technology) is near impossible. Of the listserv of 3000+ RITTI participants, only one member will talk about Linux with me. It's frightening that I'm a member of this group and that these are the people responsible for helping our children grow. Ugh. Just nutty.
Yeah, I'm as old as my UID would suggest.
I forgot, the link to the source code (ex) is in the story above. It's been like 3 months since I submitted the story, so I forgot.
---
However, the clauses that disqualify it don't seem _too_ onerous (mostly, that it can only be used "for education"), and creating a Un*x port would probably be within the rights granted by the license.
The spec is open enough in any case, and a cleanroom implementation might be possible as well.
---
off topic? I propose there be a test for level of iq before someone is granted permission to moderate.
a. Patents. Any patent obtained by a redistributor of the Program must be licensed for everyone's free use or not licensed at all.
What does this mean? Literally read it doesn't seem to be referring to Patents relating to this Program, but to any patents the redistributor obtains. Also it doesn't require patents to be licensed, you apparently can withhold permission to use your patent, or you can give permission, you just can't charge. Does that make any sense at all, or am I just horribly misreading it?
thejeff
A clear case study without the market hype showing exactly how a complete E-Education system is working cohesively. With the marketing speak and such, the actual message seems to be a bit dilluted.
Currently, I'm involved with an educational institution that is struggling to integrate all forms of technology. Lotus Notes, a proprietary FileMaker Pro grading system, NT file/print servers, Tegrity WebLearner Systems, Cisco IP Telephony, and Windows95 on every desktop. It's pretty scary and needs some work.
So what are all of you doing for your E-Education systems? What software/hardware/infrastructure/processes are used?
Well, who is going to maintain the NT box after the person "turned the key"? Schools that don't hire a dedicated administrator for their NT network are in for trouble. Maybe some schools will be naive enough to do that, but I suspect most won't.
</I><BR><BR>
It depends how long the myth that NT "dosn't need a sysadmin" persists.
which is why theres a move away from it... the SIF specification makes it fairly easy to extend the definitions, without affecting everyone's app...
but yes, it is an attempt at EDI.
... hi bingo
looks like someone needs to use a spellchecker. Sheesh. Does this void the liscense?
IANAL, but no, it doesn't. The meaning is clear, and that is what counts. Generally, or so I've been told, unless the meaning is made ambigious or indeterminable then the intended meaning is what counts. This assumes that licences are considered a) enforcible and b) legally like contracts. This is also why lawyers don't puntuate - a badly placed comma can cause a lot of problems by making a sentence ambiguious.
Still dumb though.
Indeed. "Standards" from Microsoft are things that they control and can change unilaterally when it's to their advantage to do so.
Geeky modern art T-shirts
Seriously, guys, it looks way cooler and you get way more press coverage when you give costly software away for free. The only way Linux can beat MSFT at this game is when Linux distros give bundled software away for free. Yeah, we all know it's free, but the consumer doesn't.
An example would be Red Hat or Corel giving away Secure Web Server packages away to schools. To get the high cost, you need to bundle in premium support and manuals, but the real cost is pretty cheap, especially if you can get Cobalt or someone to bundle in some Linux Server Appliances. Then give it away for free (which is deductible on their taxes).
Recently, France Telecom (which I used to own shares in, but sold (darn)) announced they were installing Linux at every public school in France. This is what it takes.
Will in Seattle
I hear this waaaay too much where I work! "We'll talk XML between applications". Let's get this straight. XML is not a communications protocol. XML is a document format language. HTML is not a communications protocol but a document formatting language. We'll talk with XML messages, what a load! HTTP over TCP/IP is a communications definition. Who is going to write the communications protocol to transfer these XML messages (ascii) back and forth over the wire and what is it going to look like?
-mwe
-mwe
Is Linux a good fit for this? Hell, yes! If there is any group which has proven that it can make reliable, extensible and fast software that sticks to standards like barnacles to rocks, it's the open-source people. And I think that would be a wonderful thing to do with it as a very first step; port the protocols (if not the actual code) to Linux, and show schools how much they can increase their system reliability and reduce their costs by using Linux/Samba/OpenSIF instead of proprietary solutions. Given the legendary cheapness of schools (as noted by so many here), that should be an easy sell.
--
Time is Nature's way of keeping everything from happening at once... the bitch.
Or maybe they jus don't want to be accused of it by a bunch of anti-MS zealots every time they endorse something?
(not that something as simple as an faq entry will stop those people, but you know...)
-- "So they told me that using the download page to download something was not something they anticipated." - Bill Gates
The main problem facing Linux in schools is Microsoft's control over school districts. I am a senior in the Seattle Public Schools and attend some of the schools' technology meetings. I have brought up the idea of putting Linux on computers because of the long term gain from such an action, but I was put down because the school district had already refused to support such an action. This is probably because we are at such a close proximity to the Evil Empire, but I have a feeling that this is what they try for all over the country if I remember their move to establish themselves as the main server environment in colleges. Anyways, Linux has more to overcome than just availability of software and ease of use (actually, in X-only mode, it is extremely good for internet/word-processing use), it has to overcome the politics inside schools, which, if you ask any school employee, is gonna be pretty hard...
As a person who has been around school officials and directors I can say all schools have one common theme...they are CHEAP.. A perfect opportunity for the Linux movement... But I ask who is educating these people about what technology should be implemented. I know back home its some backyard ISP who would not even attempt to divulge in something that is not M$. I work with system admin who won't dare even look at anything but NT...it is a really ignorant world out there.. This whole thing (linux) has turned into EDUCATION vs. Marketing Muscle EDUCATE EDUCATE EDUCATE
In many ways, such a linux installation may in fact be more stable than one using off-the-shelf PCs, especially if there is an attempt to build a simplified desktop interface for the students to use. The nice thing about linux or other X-based OSs is the ease in which such configurations can be done...
For more advanced kids, perhaps in high school, or late middle school, using UNIX can be an education in itself, at least for the minority of schools which teach any kind of serious programming/software engineering.
Fortune favors the bold. -Virgil
IMPORTANT NOTE: This license is only for use within the educational system. That means:
- no personal use
- no commercial use
- debatable for use in home schooling or distance learning. These would at least need official sponsorship from an educational system.
Still, an astonishingly good license considering that it came from Microsoft.
I'm a geek for the Yuma Union High School District in Yuma, AZ, and we've been running Debian GNU/Linux on all our servers (we're up to fifteen or so) for about two years, I guess. Before that, everything was NT (ugh). I've been here for about a year, and we've made (I think) leaps and strides in the direction of giving students access to technology and the ability to use it. We've got issues, as the people who designed the network had no vision (It was designed for 87 machines.. we now have almost 3000, with no infrastructure upgrades), but everything everywhere has issues.
:)
So.. Linux in education? My goal before leaving this job (I've been here about a year), was to have several labs running Linux desktop trials. But because of the nature of the educational system, the politics would have taken years to even test the system out (which I called the Wintermute Project.. heh). And I don't have the patience for it, unfornately.
So I suppose the only thing we need to beat Microsoft in the classroom, in educational software, or anywhere else, is patience and skill. And, looking at Linux, where it's been, and where it's going.. the free software/open source community have both.
Oh. "STL" stands for Student Technology Locker, as every student (roughly 8000 of the little buggers) gets an 'electronic locker'. I just wish someone would write technology standards well enough that the kids actually had a clue as to what was happening when they saved something to that networked drive.. Or if they were being given any sort of clue at all. Anyone care to write "Hacking 101"?
harb.
tried to save myself but myself keeps slipping away.
But as to the question whether Linux could become the standard server for this I think the answer is yes. The linux server would allow the applications on PC's to talk to one another.
no sig.
This is scary. Once you distribute this program, then you can never patent anything? Or at least not earn anything from any patents ever?
This license does not seem to restrict the patent provision AT ALL! It appears to open up ALL patents owned by the distributor to public use.
Does Microsoft corporation distribute this product? Can we get Amazon to distribute it?
Well, a lot of schools have a LOT of money invested in MS and other proprietary software (in fact, I'm on a school computer run by site-liscenced WinNT right now) and they're not going to give up this gigantic investment to go to linux. Also, if they do give up their contract, they lose a lot of the computers, which are part of the agreement. Bottom line, if it does happen, it won't be anytime soon.
-BlightX
(no sig, 'cause I'm a slacker)
Just as Microsoft gets a bunch of alternate vendors interested, if they don't change their liscense agreement out of fear of competition, they will still not be willing to let someone else dominate. If another platform starts gaining the upper hand, Microsoft will give away thousands of copies of Windows to schools not yet using this technology, and then claim victory, and list it in their "success stories" prooganda.
At my school we are all running Win95 + Novell in cooperation with a NT server. As of late 3 or 4 of the Linux users (myself not included) set up a school radio station. We are streaming over the internet and ahve 4 very pitiful computers. A Win95 box to interact with the rest of the school a small Linux box for archiving the days of music, another box w/o a hard-drive running a floppy booting custom distro our guru made and one empty tower used to elevate the 3rd.
We soon learned, having a combined total of 9 functional SourceForge projects, that VALinux has Linux OutReach/Evangelist sections, naturally we were intrigued. We are currently composing a letter asking for there support (maybe a hard-drive or two) and some pamphlets so they can rub shoulders with the faculty.
Our hope is to get a lab of 10-15 GNU/Linux computers or maybe switch the school but to do that we need a working demo box. We tried this on our own but found support in only 2 600Mb hard-drives, which is no way to blow the minds of our comp-sci department.
Well, when summer hits the entire department will be discussing possible OS/Networking switches. I know that an all NT (shudder) system and Windows 2000 (shudder*3) will be proposed along side the latest Novell systems. I have convinced our programming teacher to suggest Linux for several reasons:
He has previous *nux Experience
He wants to use a good compiler (gcc/g++)
He wants to extend the programming department past C
And because all Windows C/C++ compilers get past our security system, *all*, this is a major hazard
So any suggestions? We really hope the guys at VA will see the oppurtunity for a new client and to be our personal heros (not that they aren't all ready.
---
What exactly are the commercial possiblilities of Ovine Aviation?
The guy that used to Run the UMBC computer lab used to be the netadmin at my school....
perl -e "print(pack('H37','4d65726b7572795a40676e7572642e6e6574'))"
The School I went to used Linux for many things (this was in the early 90's) and the network admin actually turned me on to linux. I believe now, they have a Windows Lab with around 30 PCs, a MAC lab, with around 15 Macs, and a Unix/Linux Lab with around 20 Machines. Anyone else have similar goings on at their schools???
perl -e "print(pack('H37','4d65726b7572795a40676e7572642e6e6574'))"
Moderators, please bump that comment up a notch.
The license only allows you to distribute and use the software for educational purposes. This violates clause 6 of the guidelines, so it is not open source. (Clause 6 is the non-discrimination of field of endeavor).
In that case, I'd consider it another "extend and envelop" tactic; get people hooked in one area (education), and then use that as a way to corner another market (business).
Grrrr.... One scheme after another...it never ends with them!
A firewall can not protect you from yourself. Turn off what you do not need. Do not use the firewall to do your work.
Hey at last an issue where France is more advanced than the US!
:-D how to use a Crimo$oft OS, let alone an Unix!
Yes such a thing does exist!
OOPS!
I'd better say SHOULD be more advanced. For the government does have a programm forcing state outlets (eg schools) to use Linux, yet try to explain a teacher that barely knows how to use a VCR without erasing the tape more than 1 in 3 times
:D
if it's not bigger than, say, 8 megs, i'll host it
-
2^3 * 31 * 647
Not to throw a wet blanket like this, but take a deep breath and ask around before trying to be a government contractor. Unless you are very lucky and clever, you'll get annihilated by it.
OTOH, if you know your way around the Gov't procurement system (the way it really works, not the way the documentation says (sound familiar?) ) it can be a money mine.
The key is to write a nice tight contract saying exactly what you're going to do. The gov't audits the bejeesus out of the basic contract -- there's no way to make money there. If your contact is properly written, every little change has to be paid for -- kaCHING!
As to handling all the blowhard control freaks who think they're in charge, that's what you hire empty suits for.
Welcome to the Turing Tarpit, where everything is possible but nothing interesting is easy.
Well, seems that Microsoft doesn't like correct HTML (there are no FORM tags around the button to download it) so if you want it in tar.gz format goto www.contractmanager.net/sif.tar.gz. That should get you the source code, the .dll's from the dist. were lost. Hope that helps.
Well, I went to the site, and was faced with this:
| To view the demo, you will need to download
| Windows Media Player or a Microsoft Media
| Player, which is available on a variety of
| platforms.
Yeah, any OS you like, as long as it's Microsoft Windows. (Well, that's not entirely true, it looks like they've got a Mac version too, but "a variety of platforms" is somewhat overstating the case, I feel.)
Then glancing through the slashdot chat, it seems that some people trying to download the specifications through Netscape were foiled by Microsoft's non-standard HTML. And further that the file is an EXE.
The underlying concept of interoperability is all very well and good, I suppose, but does anyone else see a little irony here?
--
James Gasson
I found the concept behind this thing fairly interesting, and alas, I was unable to access the coveted spec, I keep getting active server pages telling me I haven't "Registered" yet, but when I "register", all I get is a blank page with no links. Granted, I'm using Netscape in probably the mosty Netscape-hostile environment in the universe. Anyone fare better?
Quoting from around the liscence text:
Microsoft Corporation ("Microsoft") is the title and copyright owner of the Program and offers this License which gives the licensee ("you") the legal permission to copy, distribute, modify and/or create derivatives based on the Program. The act of running the Program is not restricted.
wow, now there's something I never thought I'd see in my lifetime.
from section 4, "disclaimer of warranties":
THE ENTIRE RISK AS TO THE QUALITY AND PEROFRMANCE OF THE PROGRAM IS WITH YOU. SHOULD THE PROGRAM PROVE DEFENCTIVE, YOU ASSUME THE COST OF ALL NECESSARY SERVICING, REPAIR OR CORRECTION
looks like someone needs to use a spellchecker. Sheesh. Does this void the liscense?
And of course, this would be the world's first "open" liscence to include the infamous clause:
LIMITATION OF LIABILITY. YOUR EXCLUSIVE REMEDY UNDER THIS LICENSE SHALL NOT EXCEED FIVE DOLLARS (U.S.$5.00).
heh.
Looking for open-source Educational apps?
Look no further than http://www.seul.org
They have open-source apps targetting education and some of them have incorporated the SIF standard.
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
---
If you sell schools a box that doesn't need to be maintained and just plugs into their network and gets the job done year after year, I think you have a good value
Indeed, and with Linux, AS/400, Sun, what have you, that is exactly what you get. It's not about good value for these guys, or we would have no problems selling Linux, AS/400, et. al., since it would be a no-brainer.
The problem isn't with value, it's with perceptions. Even with Linux's momentum, NT is still positioned as the way to go. We just lost a sale to a district that had an AS/400, but migrated to 1/2 dozen NT boxes anyway.
Microsoft doesn't have to do anything, really, just sitting on the committee gives them de facto control, it appears to me.
In contrast, with Linux and similar systems, you can set up a number of centrally administered servers together with lots of low end clients. Since schools get a lot of donated hardware, the ability to run a Linux client (just X11 or VNC) on a 386 or 486 is an added bonus, and there is very little students or teachers can mess up on the machines they interact with.
No, we shouldn't try to "beat Microsoft" for the sake of beating Microsoft. And I have no problem with upper middle class families buying as much expensive Microsoft software as they like. However, for something as cost sensitive as schools (and paid for by my tax dollars), Microsoft is really a gold plated boondoggle. Systems like Linux get the job done much cheaper, with less system administration and less work by the end user. That's why Linux ought to play a big role, both in school administration and in teaching.
(Incidentally, I was involved in getting a networked system of computers installed at my high school, paid for by donations, so I have some experience with the kind of usage these systems see. And, no, it wasn't running Linux--this was pre-Linux.)
Linux's success in schools, like anywhere else, depends on being able to put together turnkey solutions that provide the functionality people want at a lower price and with less work. Linux has all the ingredients to do a better job there: Linux works just fine in "appliance servers" with virtually no maintenance, it runs on the lowest-cost hardware on the planet, and it supports a suite of protocols (X11, VNC, HTTP, etc.) that make building network-based "plug-and-play" solutions really easy.
If you sell schools a box that doesn't need to be maintained and just plugs into their network and gets the job done year after year, I think you have a good value proposition. Of course, if you position your product as "here is some software, but you need a system administrator to install Linux for you and configure it", a lot of the advantage of Linux goes away, because at least on the surface, that doesn't sound too different from NT.
its just meant to inter-connect them, and make them play nicely with each other...
:-(
basically, it takes the Student information app (demographics, grades, schedules) and allows it to interface nicely with the food cafeteria apps and the busing apps...
it also allows for easier state/federal reporting... which may/may not be a good thing depending on your view.
The ZIS bit could very well run on linux, and would be a good thing, if it were... the spec tends to favor an MS implementation because of its recommendation to use a multiple queueing mechanism to persist the messages that need to be passed...
Oh yeh - if you go and get teh MS source code for the ZIS - could you email me if you can actually get it to compile... because i cant
... hi bingo
MS has already backed off controlling this standard. THey have given control of it over to teh SIIA. THere was some thought that it would be less well received if MS were seen as the controller of it...
... hi bingo
In the health care industry there is a loose (i.e. loosely followed) message standard called HL7 (health level 7) which is a delimited format. However they have been working on 3.0 which is based on XML. I have heard that Microsoft is very much interested and involved in this new standard. Also I went to an XML seminar (read: marketing) where they described the BizTalk (business world XML messaging) XML standard as well as their (vaporware as of yet?) XML message server. I get the feeling MS sees XML being an important standard across all industries.
I am quite interested in exactly what kind of applications are going to be created with this standard.
Slashdot social engineering at it's finest
The solution the shortage of able sysadmins, of course, is to make the kids the sysadmins. George Gilder wrote this article about a school that did just that. It seems to work, and it gives some kids a chance to excel at something where they may have really hated school otherwise(sound familiar?).
Gnu GPL:
You may not copy, modify, sublicense, or distribute the Program except as expressly provided under this License. Any attempt otherwise to copy, modify, sublicense or distribute the Program is void, and will automatically terminate your rights under this License. However, parties who have received copies, or rights, from you under this License will not have their licenses terminated so long as such parties remain in full compliance.
MS ZIS EULA:
Other Limitations. You may not copy, modify, sublicense or distribute the Program except as expressly provided under this License. Any attempt otherwise to copy, modify, sublicense or distribute the Program is void, and will automatically terminate your rights under this License. However, parties who have received copies, or rights, from you under this License will not have their licenses terminated so long as such parties remain in full compliance.
Gnu GPL:
7. If, as a consequence of a court judgment or allegation of patent infringement or for any other reason (not limited to patent issues), conditions are imposed on you (whether by court order, agreement or otherwise) that contradict the conditions of this License, they do not excuse you from the conditions of this License. If you cannot distribute so as to satisfy simultaneously your obligations under this License and any other pertinent obligations, then as a consequence you may not distribute the Program at all. For example, if a patent license would not permit royalty-free redistribution of the Program by all those who receive copies directly or indirectly through you, then the only way you could satisfy both it and this License would be to refrain entirely from distribution of the Program.
MS ZIS EULA:
Intellectual Property Claims. If, as a result of an intellectual property claim, conditions are imposed on you (whether by court order, agreement or otherwise) that contradict the conditions of this License, they do not excuse you from compliance with the terms and conditions of this License. If you cannot distribute the Program so as to satisfy simultaneously your obligations under this License and any other pertinent obligations, then you may not distribute the Program at all.
Gnu GPL:
2. You may modify your copy or copies of the Program or any portion of it, thus forming a work based on the Program, and copy and distribute such modifications or work under the terms of Section 1 above, provided that you also meet all of these conditions: a) You must cause the modified files to carry prominent notices stating that you changed the files and the date of any change. b) You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third parties under the terms of this License. c) If the modified program normally reads commands interactively when run, you must cause it, when started running for such interactive use in the most ordinary way, to print or display an announcement including an appropriate copyright notice and a notice that there is no warranty (or else, saying that you provide a warranty) and that users may redistribute the program under these conditions, and telling the user how to view a copy of this License. (Exception: if the Program itself is interactive but does not normally print such an announcement, your work based on the Program is not required to print an announcement.)
MS ZIS EULA:
Modification. You may modify the Program or create derivative works and copy and distribute such modifications or derivative works, provided that you also: (i) cause the modified files to carry prominent notices stating that you changed the files and the date of any change so that the recipients know they are not receiving the original Program; (ii) cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any part thereof, to be licensed as a whole to all third parties under the terms of this License; and (iii) provide notice to users under the same terms of distribution as set forth in Sections 1(a)(i), 1(a)(ii) and 1(a)(iii) above.
-- THIS SPACE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK -- --
I gave the license a once-over look and I don't think it is any kind of Free software, either from a BSD, GPL, or OSD perspective.
v ersions sense either.
Yes it has the advertising clause a la old-school BSD license. It does provide the right to redistribute modifications, however it does not give you the right to restrict the rights of those you sell your version of the program to, so it is not really like BSD at all. It would be more like GPL except there are other things that make it not like GPL.
Firstly, you do not have the right to run the software for any purpose you wish. It says "Educational use only." I assume this means, running in an educational environment as opposed to education from the program itself but it is still a discriminator license that would NOT meet the open source definition.
Unlike any Free software license I've ever seen, you cannot charge fees to license the software. However they leave gaping loopholes for what you can charge for so it is not that big a deal.
I see no mention of source code (does that apply to this product? I'm only looking at the license posted and not what the product itself is) so I'm not sure if it qualifies as free software in the GPL sense. It isn't free in the BSD I-can-do-whatever-I-want-including-making-closed-
I don't think I'll need to give grounds as I claim that linux (or whatever free OS, mind you, so better get to it :) is The Choice of Schools. Inexpensive, yet powerful, robust agains misuse (damned script-kiddies) etc, I could carry on for hours. The thing that is keeping linux from schools is the lack of experience with them.
Now, if every (most) schools would get a chance to get a linux server running locally, even if it was maintained by an outsider, it just might be enough to wake up the teachers' interest in it. When there's already one, it's not quite as hard to get another one.
As kids study how to use computers (what's the correct term for this?) and eventually learn it (linux), it'll be a lot easier to get a linux computer home as well.
There's always a downside. The one in this might be that if the teachers aren't skilled enough, the dream could turn into a nightmare: kids knowing the OS better (they already do, but FAR better) than the system administrators. That could turn up a new generation of script kiddies. This time they had the chance to practice their skills full time and on real systems with real (= dumb) users. Prevent that.
Any product you choose must be safe (for you, not for the end-user). If there is any chance you might be criticised for your choice, it's not worth the risk, even if it's free. The upside, if any, won't help you, the down-side certainly will hurt you.
First cost is important:savings which don't show up in this budget cycle are generally meaningless. Ongoing costs are important too, in a perverse way: a purchase which requires a large, continuing expense is job security for the administrator who has gotten it approved into his budget. If you then tell this administrator that you have a solid alternative which is free to buy and far lower cost to operate, do you think he'll be happy? You've made him look like a fool, and shrunk his budget. That's how civil service underlings get fired.
Other than the all-important issue of keeping the budget as big as possible, money really doesn't matter. It's not your money, it's yours to spend! That's very different. And the greatest sin of all is letting the fiscal year end without having used up your entire budget. That makes it plain that you didn't need such a big budget in the first place. That makes everyone unhappy (except the taxpayers, but screw them, they have no influence that matters to government employees)
The questions we ask in the private world include:
None of these things really matter in government service. There the important points are:Microsoft is safe today, and expensive, just as IBM was safe and expensive twenty years ago. If you put together a superior product, expect to see it used by school clubs, and so on, who weren't getting any funding, anyway. Don't expect it to make great inroads anywhere things go out for bid, even though the price is $0.00. There are legal ways to turn down the low bidder, if you've written your spec's right.
Nels
See what I've been reading.
most systems (if not all ) in the science and health professions are already running UNIX based shells. excluding MIT and Harvard, take smaller more prominent universities like Carneigie Mellon and Duquesne University (both in pittsburgh) for example. other than the use of NT in computer labs for the students to work on projects with... all of the quantitative and qualitative analysi are done with UNIX, SGI, or SPARC. its just the path for the future. as our society becomes more scientificly centered, the use of these machines increases. prior knowledge of these machines would make or break a job employment oppertunity (less training, more money saved).
its a great idea... just as long microsoft doesnt go and change the standard to fit their lazy needs
Q.Is the specification based on Microsoft technologies?
A.No. The SIF specification is based on the W3C endorsed standard Extensible Markup Language (XML). It defines common data formats and high-level rules of interaction and architecture, and <i>is not linked to a particular operating system or platform</i>. [emphasis their's]
Interesting. If only one good thing has come out of the anti-trust trial, it is that distrust in Microsoft has now reached the point where they are actually saying, in so many words, "we're not locking you into this" whenever they endorse a new spec or technology.
ZIS EULA
-----------------------------------------------
MICROSOFT LICENSE AGREEMENT
FOR ZONE INTEGRATION SERVER
By modifying or distributing the Zone Integration Server (the "Program") or any modifications or derivatives based on the Program, you indicate your acceptance of this License and all its terms and conditions for copying, distributing or modifying the Program. There is no warranty for the Program.
Microsoft Corporation ("Microsoft") is the title and copyright owner of the Program and offers this License which gives the licensee ("you") the legal permission to copy, distribute, modify and/or create derivatives based on the Program. The act of running the Program is not restricted.
License Grant. Subject to the restrictions in Section 2 below, your use of the Program is as follows:
Use and Copy of Source Code. You may copy and distribute the Program source code exactly as you receive it, in any medium, provided that you (i) conspicuously and appropriately publish on each copy an appropriate copyright notice, if applicable, and disclaimer of warranty; (ii) keep intact all the notices that refer to this License and to the absence of any warranty; and (iii) give any other recipients of the Program a copy of this License along with the Program. All recipients must receive the same rights you have. You may not impose any further restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein.
Modification. You may modify the Program or create derivative works and copy and distribute such modifications or derivative works, provided that you also: (i) cause the modified files to carry prominent notices stating that you changed the files and the date of any change so that the recipients know they are not receiving the original Program; (ii) cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any part thereof, to be licensed as a whole to all third parties under the terms of this License; and (iii) provide notice to users under the same terms of distribution as set forth in Sections 1(a)(i), 1(a)(ii) and 1(a)(iii) above.
DESCRIPTION OF OTHER RIGHTS AND LIMITATIONS.
Patents. Any patent obtained by a redistributor of the Program must be licensed for everyone's free use or not licensed at all.
Other Limitations. You may not copy, modify, sublicense or distribute the Program except as expressly provided under this License. Any attempt otherwise to copy, modify, sublicense or distribute the Program is void, and will automatically terminate your rights under this License. However, parties who have received copies, or rights, from you under this License will not have their licenses terminated so long as such parties remain in full compliance.
Education Purposes Only. The Program is licensed exclusively for educational purposes. You have no rights under this License unless you are using the Program for educational purposes only and solely within the educational system (e.g., grades K-12 or higher education use).
Fees. You cannot charge a fee for licensing the Program. You may charge a fee (i) for the physical act of transferring a copy of the Program; (ii) in the event you wish to provide support services for the Program; or (iii) for any modifications or derivatives of the Program.
Intellectual Property Claims. If, as a result of an intellectual property claim, conditions are imposed on you (whether by court order, agreement or otherwise) that contradict the conditions of this License, they do not excuse you from compliance with the terms and conditions of this License. If you cannot distribute the Program so as to satisfy simultaneously your obligations under this License and any other pertinent obligations, then you may not distribute the Program at all.
MISCELLANEOUS.
This License represents the complete agreement concerning the subject matter hereof. If any provision of this License is held to be unenforceable, such provision shall be reformed only to the extent necessary to make it enforceable.
This License is governed by the laws of the State of Washington.
If the distribution and/or use of the Program is restricted in certain countries either by patents or by copyrighted interfaces, the original copyright holder who places the Program under this License may add an explicit geographical distribution limitation excluding those countries, so that distribution is permitted only in or among countries not thus excluded. In such case, this License incorporates the limitation as if written in the body of this License.
DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTIES.
NO WARRANTY. BECAUSE THE PROGRAM IS LICENSED FREE OF CHARGE, THERE IS NO WARRANTY FOR THE PROGRAM, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW. EXCEPT WHEN OTHERWISE STATED IN WRITING THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND/OR OTHER PARTIES PROVIDE THE PROGRAM "AS-IS" WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, AND NONINFRINGEMENT. THE ENTIRE RISK AS TO THE QUALITY AND PEROFRMANCE OF THE PROGRAM IS WITH YOU. SHOULD THE PROGRAM PROVE DEFENCTIVE, YOU ASSUME THE COST OF ALL NECESSARY SERVICING, REPAIR OR CORRECTION.
NO LIABILITY FOR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES. TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, IN NO EVENT SHALL MICROSOFT, ITS SUPPLIERS NOR THIRD-PARTY CONTENT PROVIDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, INDIRECT, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES WHATSOEVER (INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF BUSINESS PROFITS, BUSINESS INTERRUPTION, LOSS OF BUSINESS INFORMATION, OR ANY OTHER PECUNIARY LOSS) ARISING OUT OF THE USE OF OR INABILITY TO USE THE PROGRAM, EVEN IF MICROSOFT HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES. BECAUSE SOME STATES AND JURISDICTIONS DO NOT ALLOW THE EXCLUSION OR LIMITATION OF LIABILITY FOR CONSEQUENTIAL OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES, THE ABOVE LIMITATION MAY NOT APPLY TO YOU.
LIMITATION OF LIABILITY. YOUR EXCLUSIVE REMEDY UNDER THIS LICENSE SHALL NOT EXCEED FIVE DOLLARS (U.S.$5.00).
An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi
I must say I agree. While M$ is doing it's best to beat others, I think we should try to be better. Offer a hand instead of spitting on them. If we could offer nice interoperability between Windows and UNIX machines, it wouldn't perhaps be as big a step to go from Win32 to UNIX...
Just this kind of misuse linux (or whatever UNIX. I'm not going to repeat this again, so s/linux/whatever UNIX/) would stand up to. Have every user an account of their own (or instead, one for every teacher and kids'd share one read-only account). And a nice, pre-configured configs should any of the teachers mess their GUI up.
How well do X terminals stand just cutting the power?
You stole my line...
As government institutions, they follow a number of arcane rules on procurement. So an Open Source alternative will have an uphill fight to gain acceptance. Some thoughts:
Most government agencies work off of bids for products. This usually doesn't match the business model of the OS corps, so it makes us look worse on paper. Also, the government is notoriously inept at signing seemingly good contracts with vendors of proprietary equipment. Of course, when the vendor's equipment saddles them with a transition cost of going to a competitor or Opens Source alternative, they again look at the options and decide that it is most cost effective to pay more for the proprietary product. This is akin to 'no money down', huge monthly payments.
Another problem is the idea of working with a traditional vendor vs. newer better ones. Government procurement 'experts' are not typically very up on modern technology, and typically have arcane rules designed around reality circa five-10 years ago. Mention a modern business model and they look at you like you just landed from mars.
Procurement, even at the local level, is usually a bureaucratic and time-consuming process. In the past, the reward was a huge captive market. But the economics of software makes not worth it except for large companies with large legal departments (like MS).
Finally, especially in school systems, it is nearly impossible for a company to deal with someone who has authority. Most times, the multiple steps in the process mean that you have to deal with conflicting agendas and have a product that is all things to all people.
Not to throw a wet blanket like this, but take a deep breath and ask around before trying to be a government contractor. Unless you are very lucky and clever, you'll get annihilated by it.
First Post!
The goal shouldn't be to "beat Microsoft" in this market. I do service work for a few schools and the teachers are probably the worst of all users whom I've encountered.
Just yesterday, the school I was at had a stack of service request forms and nearly half of them were because one idiot teacher saw that some kids had deleted an alias from the desktop and thought that the computers were broken.
These people aren't going to embrace linux. They've struggled long and hard to be able to turn on and turn off Windows and MacOS machines. Most of them don't have the desire or the ability to learn to use linux.
It's already known that linux can compete with M$ in the server arena. We won't be able to, nor should we want to bankrupt M$. The goal is to have as many choices as possible. MacOS, Linux, *BSD, Windows (whatever), BeOS, and straight old fashioned *NIX are all acceptable OSes for a given task.
M$ will be around in some form or another for the forseeable future, because so many business and governments have invested their futures in it's products. What we need as an atmosphere of healthy and honest competition.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
Nathan Whitehead
Also, it seems to share a number of RMS's requirements, such as the patent issue. From MS's license:
This is quite interesting. I suspect this license would fall under the open source guidelines, and quite possibly qualify as Free Software as well.
Is this a first from Microsoft? Does this mark a quiet change in strategy, or are they just making sure that they can avoid any legal issues? I suspect government contracts might have provisions against the use of proprietary stuff. Or they should, not that that's stopped the people in my school district... They seem to enjoy locking students into only using Word or some such.
TO BUY A NEW CAR WOULD MAKE YOU SEXUALLY ATTRACTIVE.