Slashdot Mirror
Perens Pushes "Sincere Choice" for Software
jalefkowit writes "Looks like Bruce Perens has found something to keep him occupied, now that he's parted ways with HP: the Register is covering his launch of a new political platform, "Sincere Choice", which he wrote to clarify the distinctions between the values of the open-source community and the Microsoft-funded Institute for Software Choice. Sincere Choice addresses several issues in critical to open software, including interoperability, competition by merit, open standards, and copyright."
"Bruce Perens writes: "At the San Francisco Chronicle's SF Gate, Hal Plotkin points to Sincere Choice as the right compromise for an IT renaissance in Government including both Open Source and proprietary software. The article is extremely flattering to yours truly, but a good push in the right direction from a well-respected commentator." "
...but never will. I'm no Microsoft fan, but there are a few things they've done right (!) - Office and DirectX come to mind. I like Office. Sure, it's bloated, but it works pretty damn well for most people. I like DirectX because I like games, and they all seem to be coded around it. So while I may never use a Microsoft OS, I'd love to see some real software choice. I'd love to be able to run a native install of Office on Mandrake. I'd love to be able to play linux versions of more games. If MS would realize that they can sell software without selling you the whole OS I'm sure they could sell some apps for other OS's and still sell Windows. That's all I want.
do not read this line twice.
It boggles the mind why OSS/FS word processors keep developing new formats. Who cares if the format is "open" if no one uses it? MS Word .Doc files are insufficent as a standard because they're undocumented, which is why converters are still flakey in many cases.
RTF, on the other hand, does almost everything you need. It's missing OLE (99.999% of don't people need that), and it's missing VB Macros (100% of people don't need that), but it covers everything that most people are going to do. It's fully and completely documented. It's Word-compatible. It's WordPerfect-compatible. It's compatible with most OSS word processors. Heck, with the right software it's Palm OS compatible!
Yet some OSS word processors (read: KWord) still don't support it. And they all invent their own formats. How does that encourage progression away from Ubiquitous MS Word?
--GrouchoMarx
Card-carrying member of the EFF, FSF, and ACLU. Are you?
Governments should be required to use only software that is amenable to public examination.
Wow am I tired of reading this red herring.
By the same twisted logic, all vehicles purchased by governments should have their blueprints, down to the VLSI layout of the controller, available freely. Because there's no other way to do "public examination".
Public examination does not mean you get to micro-manage every decision made by the government. It means that the government process should be open and accessible, and that decisions should be reviewable and accountable. California buying more licenses of Oracle than there are constituents in the state is a wonderful example of the process gone wrong. And several people got their asses fired for it, and the contract is being reviewed last I heard. That is public examination.
Otherwise the citizens will have no control over or access to their government's data
So mandate open standards in document storage format. That's all that's needed. What software creates the document is irrelevant - as long as the format is standard and available then the public can view it in a variety of methods - whether it's the same program used to create the document or not.
We can see this clearly in the new voting equipment that's being installed in parts of Florida
If by clearly you mean "there's absolutely no proof that the software was at fault or that OSS would do better" then I'll agree with you. Otherwise you're twisting reality again.
So anyone who can bribe the software vendors can control the election
Ah, so OSS will stop bribes? Are you sure I couldn't bribe someone to install stealth code on the actual field systems that would go undetected? Sure, you have the source code in front of you. That's nice. It's not what's running on the box, and the right bribes in the right places can ensure that modifications will never be noticed.
Open document formats? Hell yes. Forced Open Source? No. That's no better than being forced to use proprietary software. You're implementing artificial restrictions that will help ensure the best product doesn't get used.
Since this entire argument is about computer stored files, anyone without a computer is pretty damn SOL. Maybe we should store all the data on paper. In Esperanto. After all, that's the official universal language, right?
.doc, and I guarantee further than not even 90% of Californians, by a great, great margin have that capability.
That is exactly one of the points of the Peruvian and Argentinian arguments against proprietary software. If they are going to be running their government on-line, then every citizen must have access. Thus, every citizen must have access to a computer capable of communicating with the government software. Thus, if the government wants to run itself on-line, it has to provide these computers.
It is much, much cheaper for the Peruvian government to set out terminals running free software than running Office XP.
The point is, the Peruvian government isn't going to make 90% of its people buy Microsoft Windows and Microsoft Office, and neither should the United States government. As more and more government services are offered on-line, is it fair to continue distributing those services in Microsoft Word format? Or is it more fair to ensure that the format is open, so that free software can be used?
Wow, way to take things out of context!
That is the context we are talking about. Specifically, the ISC's challenge to the governments of Peru, Columbia, Italy, and others, and the State of California requiring the use of open standards in all government computing services, and Bruce Parens' rebuke of that challenge. I guaranteee you that 90% of the people of Peru do not own computers capable of viewing
Thus, as I said, the state then has to provide the means to access, and it can either buy 1 million PCs running Windows XP, and Office XP, and "hope" that there are no surprses in licensing down the line, or it can run software built on open standards.
Of the personal computers in the US, the vast majority (90% or more I'd be willing to bet) are capable of reading a Word document.
Yes, technically my computer is "capable" of reading a Microsoft Word Document. I could go out and buy a copy of Office XP for $400 dollars, or whatever it costs nowadays. I could take the hours to download OpenOffice. But neither is a good solution to the problem, which is the closed format itself.
Shrug, keep your holier-than-thou attitude
Sorry if I came off that way, I am quite aware that I am a loser.
MORTAR COMBAT!