Slashdot Mirror
Israel's Finance Ministry To Distribute OpenOffice
dudeman2 writes "Israel National News reports that The Israel Finance Ministry said Sunday it will begin distributing Open Office for free as of next week. The ministry said that it would begin to distribute thousands of Open Office CD-ROMs at public computer centers and later on at community centers throughout the country, 'in a bid to reduce the technological gap between the rich and poor in Israel'."
If there is a Hebrew localization of Office, what is to stop a zillion people from pirating it? (like everywhere else)
If Microsoft can focus on LOWER licensing costs and improved Jewish language support, things may change and the GATES of communication will once again
the question is what does israel want? free software or good software. Do you want microsoft software instead but don't want it because it is too expensive? or do you don't want it because it doesnt meet your requirements? Also how does ms being a monopoly affect your decision since you easily switched to another software without suffering any effects from this monopoly you are so scared of
did you forget to take your meds?
Stop with the PC crap already! Why is everybody walking on egg-shells every time something related to Israel is being discussed? Why is every criticism of the state of Israel (like the brutal occupation of Palestine) being labelled as racism?
I for one am sick of it.
giving people free cds is like giving them free gasoline. it is almost useless to anyone without a car.
did you forget to take your meds?
This is somewhat offtopic, but doesn't anyone think that Israel has bigger problems to deal with right now, instead of distributing OpenOffice.org CDs?
Because God knows that if you have troubles with your neighbors you should Immediately cease any attempt at doing silly little things like bettering your information infrastructure or freeing up valuble resources that were previously going to a monopoly that was selling you software that you couldn't use properly.
Despite the anti-jewish trolls (someone mod these jerks down PLEASE, this is a TECH page!!!!). The decision Israel made points out both advantage and disadvantages of OS like OpenOffice.org.
First, there are still compatibility issues. Although OpenOffice is a great office suite as is it still has problems converting from other formats. Therefore, even though it is free, government agencies that MUST access historical files in the original form do incur further expense in making an accurate file conversion.
Second, when you have a government agency that requires certain forms to be filled out electronically you have to make sure that the people filling out those forms have access to the programs to do this. This problem is exacerbated by the first concern previously mentioned.
Israel seems to have thought this through. That's why they're giving the disks away and also why they're biting the bullet and paying for properly converting the files (part of the installation process).
If OS software is going to ever really make any imprint in the government or any other institution we're going to have to be honest. OS may be cheap, but nothings truly free.
It doesn't matter what you wrap your emotions around, Reality is a brick wall specifically designed to scramble eggs
He may be referring to hidden costs like having to learn the quirks of the way it works, i.e., the differences between it and MS Office.
Also, he may be thinking that someone has to go to each desktop rather than letting the users install.
All of that is just guessing and I have not used Open Office yet.
Eve Fairbanks says I drive a hybrid!LOL
Don't most computer come with a rudimentary work processor and spreadsheet?
OpenOffice is not a "rudimentary" word processor and spreadsheet. The "rudimentary" stuff you mention is intentionally inadequate for a lot of people.
Can someone say 'I don't need MS Office so take that off my bill." I think we have already tried and failed to get MS to refund licensing costs.
It's much easier to get a PC without paying for Office than to get a PC without paying for Windows.
Is giving away copies of OOo going to reduce the cost of buying a computer so that it is affordable to everyone?
Well, it sure makes a big difference. You can buy a PC for less than the price of MS Office these days. So eliminating MS Office from the package halves the price. I'd say that makes a computer affordable to a lot more people, wouldn't you?
OpenOffice is a cross-platform suite. It's not just for Linux. I use the Windows version all the time.
Free software for the win32 platform is (I think) an important front of the F/OSS movement. Most people are unwilling to take the plunge straight into Linux. Using free software on win32 is a way to wade in and test the waters before jumping in. The win32 port of The GIMP was the first thing that got me really excited about free software, and I have since migrated to more free and open source applications and operating systems. For those of you running windows who would like to check out some free software, follow the links below:
Saddam's army attacked US troops, *not* peacekeepers.
I *have* heard of the 9/11 attack, It
was not Afganistan. It was a group of
mostly Saudi people, not by a nation.
US was not retaliating Panama.
9/11 30 years ago. Ironic is it not?
True enough. Now, for the Americans in the audience, name which of these two equally-culpable psychopathic nations is the recipient of billion$ of your tax dollars per year?
And who should be accepting responsibility?
Gas-guzzling autos and tobacco products are also a big part of certain segments of our population's economy.
I don't think either are acceptable and all need to move to another line of work, and/or adapt. Just because something lines our pocketbooks doesn't mean we should promote or endorse it.
Just offhand (as my son and I were watching C.S. Lewis' _Voyage of the Dawn Treder_ last night), I believe slavery was a big money maker, and illicit drugs still are. Of course, many ways of handling the last, but my point was that just because something makes a lot of money, doesn't mean it should remain or be propped up as some sacred cow.
Speaking of sacred cows and money... oh, wait, that's another story.
I think the bottom line is, anytime an entire people are singled out as a 'problem', it's a problem.
Amongst the people in charge there are no innocents, but among the poor everyday commoner who has no beef with anybody, it's a different story. As is always the case in situations like these - guess who suffers more?
"...Well, there's egg and bacon; egg sausage and bacon; egg and spam; egg bacon and spam; egg bacon sausage and spam..."
Can an economist answer this one?
Which is a better scenario...
A) Where everyone has in the country pays $100 for software, generating a $30,000,000,000/yr industry.
B) Everyone in the country gets $100 worth of software for free, destroying a $30,000,000,000 industry.
Is it just the change from one to another that is the problem? Or is there some hidden danger from everyone on the planet being born with 'rights' to software that used to cost $1,000 a seat?
I mean, sheesh, that's like $6,000,000,000,000 added to the global economy overnight. For 'free'.
+&x
I realize that just fine. It's not a doom and gloom scenario, just a very strange one. Something of immense dollar value is replaced by something of no dollar value. The value to society is still provided (the service of the software) and the money can and will move to another place, but the outlook for an economy might not be so rosy, even to the extreme that it could cause a strange panic and real damage.
So I'm curous how such things would look to an economist.
+&x
Because, contrary to the parent poster's assertion, Arutz 7 doesn't speak for the "majority voice of the people of Israel". Politically, it is in fact an extreme right wing organization, backed by right wing political parties and settlers' organizations. It's only a "majority" in the sense that the American Moral Majority is one.
To present just one data point, opinion polls consistently show that the Israeli population overwhelmingly supports the formation of a Palestinian state (around a 60% majority), an idea which is abhorrent to Arutz 7 and its backers.
Arutz 7's history is rife with controversy, from its announcers' miserable show of merriment when breaking the news of the massacre of 29 arabs in Hebron in 1994, to their infamous attacks on the late Israeli prime minister, Izhak Rabin, which were blamed as one of the factors that led to his assassination. To say that Arutz 7 was in any sense mainstream in its views is disingenuous.
Why would they clamp down on right-wing stations?
I would hardly describe allowing a pirate radio station to operate for over a decade as a clamp down. Left wing circles in Israel have repeatedly accused the government of complacency in their dealings with Arutz 7, and the amount of time it took to shut it down serves as evidence that they may have been right.
I have some good friends from Palestine who are very vocal about the issue. I have some good friends from Israel who are likewise very vocal about the issue. They are all very highly educated, very articulate, and very much believe in their perspective views. As such I have heard countless arguments on both sides over the years. I have seen numbers from both sides proving what they say, but in the end, they don't matter. You can make numbers say what ever you want them to - and both sides do. Both sides put out numbers showing how they were harmed, and how little they have harmed the other. These numbers are not stopping either side from killing the other, just encouraging it.
Numbers like these lead to more donations to Palestine some of which buys more weapons. When Israel does its the same thing - more money to buy weapons. They don't lead to any solutions, only finger pointing, name-calling and more bloodshed.
You know what angers me most? It's my own part in it. The majority of funding for this - both sides of this - comes from the USA. Until a few years ago I contributed to both sides in my charitable giving, and even worse, for a long time I did not take the time to understand the various points of view, and see my own part in it. So yes, I have blood on my hands as well. I often wonder what would happen if the money just stopped flowing.
Before I get off my soapbox, can anyone tell me how much money Israel has spent caring for those Palestinians injured in their various attacks on Palestine? How about telling me how much money Palestine has spent caring for those injured in Israel by suicide Palestinian bombers?
And we are surprised this keeps going on?
Short term, maybe. Long term, it's absolutely a good thing. Each consumer who would otherwise have paid $100 for the software instead uses it on her next preferred alternative, which she otherwise wouldn't have been able to obtain, so clearly she's better off. The argument might then be that software publishers and their employees suffer, but this is at most a temporary effect. Demand for (paid) software will decrease, but demand for other goods will increase (because of the extra $100 that consumers have to spend), so production and jobs are just being reallocated, not lost.
Similarly, the discovery of a cheap, clean, abundant, and renewable energy source would be great for the world's economy, despite the problems it might cause for oil companies and others.
How to solve most of our problems: 1.Lots of nuclear plants. 2.Cure aging.
For example, Israeli hospitals such as Hadassah, are known for taking in everybody regardless of religion or background, including terrorists. One surgeon recently blinded by a terrorist attack had in fact reattached the hand of a Palestinian bomb maker, only to be nearly killed by one later.
It appears as though your gut reflex would be to give more aid, and it's an understandable instinct. The problem is, as numerous studies have shown, terrorism is perpetrated by middle class and upper class people by a far greater margin than those impoverished. Palestinians get the most aid per capita in the world according to the World Bank (no longer avail online, from a Jerusalem Post reprint of an Associated Press article dated Feb 19, 2003):
The key is in the education - one that's currently under the control of a group of thugs sadly put in place by both my and Israel's governments.
Your compassion is understandable and commendable, but ignoring the strategy behind terrorism will only lead to more of it. There's a wide political spectrum in Israel, don't you find it curious that it doesn't exist on the other side of the divide (usually because they're dragged out in the street and hung for their political views)?
By the way, you have nowhere near as much blood on your hands as, say, the average European. At least our government officials don't secretly delight at the prospect of our funds going to the likes of Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and Al Aksa Martyrs Brigade. EU government officials hoping to prevent funds going to terrorist groups is a rare thing. As Chris Patten famously said, they'd want an investigation of where the funds were going like he'd like a hole in the head.
Software generally are intermediate goods - it doesn't add to the GDP of a country (or globally) no matter what Microsoft say. No work has been done when an item valued at $100 is given away. Thought the scenario a) seems to show a $30 billion industry in fact all that has done is remove nearly $30 billion from the money supply because Microsoft charge a lot more than they ever pay their programmers or even shareholders. The rest sits in the bank in cash doing nothing. In scenario b) though MS may say that they gave away $30 billion of software in fact they have given away nothing of any value as no money has actually been exchanged. That $100 per person thats not being given to Microsoft will end up being used more usefully in other ways.
You can also reduce this to a view that value is only added when you add human labour. Taking some bunch of EXE/DLLs and adding a $100 price to it doesn't instantly create a $30 billion industry whereas if $100 was paid directly to 500,000 programmers 600 times over then you could argue that you have a $30 billion industry.
Fact remains that if I download Linux and pay my $100 for the books/manuals or an extra hard disk then more value have been added to the economy than if I simply paid $100 to MS. Thus spending money on Open Source software contributes a lot more to the GDP than if its used on packaged products.