Slashdot Mirror
Software Livre, Anyone?
tbray writes "They just had this
huge OSS conference in Brazil. One good write-up by Simon Phipps is here. And hey, down there, OSS and Java play nice together."
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
Finally, 3rd world countries are getting it!
Free / Open Source software is the way to go.
You can't make your country a developed one by importing overrated and overprized propietary technology.
By the way, the brazilian goverment is also doing a good job negotiating FTAA (ALCA), not like most other countries in Latin America, which are desesperatly yielding to "free trade" agreements with the US, which only benefit big bussines and make more restrictive IP regulation, like the DMCA, software patents and extensive pharma patents for their countries.
I disagree.
OSS is not being embraced because its zero cost, but because you have the freedom to do what you like with the source.
For example the performance of Oracle in certain situations may be preferable to any of the zero cost DB's, even to the point of justifying the large expenditure, but if there is a bug you *really* need fixed or a feature you want to add, then you are dependent on Oracle to change the codebase - which could be an even bigger cost!
Of course java has the source code available for you to do this. The concern there is that may not always be the case.
Actually I suspect it's both kinds of free propelling acceptance. Think about it.
Without both I'd likely have never tried linux.
Plus bussiness have to meet a bottom line. The lack of up front cost for the software is attractive for that reason, and fact that they can tailor it more exactly to thier specific needs can improve efficiency and again impact thier bottom line.
Joe sixpack is much less likely to replace windows with something doesn't run moose sniper 9 and let him do that online billing thing if he has to pay out any significant $$ for it.
And of course your local computer geek gets all sorts of toys he can actually play with without having eula's threaten to do evil things if takes it apart and requiring his imortal soul and first born simply to run.
It's a good and altruist a motive to sing the virtues of open source I agree. But not paying $200+ a pop to mearly be able to actually run that nice shiny computer is a pretty nice thing as well.
Mycroft
https://signup.leagueoflegends.com/?ref=4c3ed6600b6ea
Also, you say that rights to modify programs can be bought from any company, but you can't find software that costs nothing. Let's take a look at a company almost everyone hates: Micro$oft. They certainly provide some free-as-in-beer software to the public, especially when it bolsters their monopoly. An example is the Visual C++ compiler. What I've never heard of is someone buying the source code to, say, Windows.
Allowing people to get the software for free is one of the many reasons free software can compete with proprietary programs, but that's only a byproduct of the real purpose: to let people actually buy software and do with it as they please, not just a license to use it in the way the author envisioned.
I have discovered a truly remarkable proof of this theorem that this sig is too small to contain.
I'm a blue collar worker so I am always amazed at the idea that somehow cheaper/freer/more useful tools are somehow bad for the economy. Man, cheap/free/better is GREAT to increase productivity. Like today, I have to go work on a medium sized diesel mower (kubota f2000 to be exact) that has some busted hydraulics. I have to stop my real productivity (mowing in this case),experience unexpected "downtime", the stuff that makes me my real coin, rummage through my tools, hope I have enough of everything I need to get to the busted part, then hope I can fix it without purchasing an entire new part. If there was a way I could replicate what I needed, make a copy, and if I knew I could just go get all the tools I needed for cheap/free, MAN 0 MAN would that be nice. I know I might have to pay a fee for a part, but if it's too much, and they want to charge me for the knowlege of how to deal with that part, and insist I can only use their brand tools to work on it, etc, it starts to slide into the sucky range. There needs a common sense balance here.
Charging through the nose for tools, I mean, say if I had to subscribe to tools, and had to constantly keep paying for tools that never improved much, and kept breaking, etc, would really suck. The REAL productivity would never get much better, I'd be stuck in tool/parts cost expense hell, productivty would keep dropping, not improving, and everyone starts to suffer.. Whenever the cost/price of tools and parts drops, and when the aggregation of the tools and parts (in this case a functioning tractor) increase, I am more productive, make more loot. Less downtime, less hassle, less headaches etc. I'm not out to make the tool companies rich,they can make a few clamss off me but not so much that it makes my job impossible. They have to stay real and keep their tools and parts good enough and cheap enough and functional enough for me to keep going in my real job. There's a symbiosis here that benfits all, but it would never happen if the tools and parts cost more than what the job makes. If it gets to the point that the aggregate is just not worth it, then that's that, it no longer is profitable for ANYONE concerned in the whole deal.
My point is, tools and parts are for the REAL WORK, they, in and of themselves, are NOT the entire real work. That's the major difference in see in the softwarez and IT world between closed/expensive/propietary and cheap(er)/free(er)/ and more open.
My best guess is, for example, the way-just a randomness here, say redhat- is approaching this situation fits closer to a profitable/workable arrangement for all concerned, shifting to non tangible products and tools. It's not perfect, not yet, but getting better and evolving to a happier medium that benefits all concerned. The over all societal benefit in having closer to free/cheap tools and parts, and tools and parts that people are free to modify for a particular purpose (say I need a wrench to fit into a tight spot, I can bend it in a vise to make it fit, no license or permission required, and I can share the design with others and still not suffer), then this is a good thing.
And I HAVE done this in meat space. There's an industry specific tool that's used all over that I designed and had built the first examples of.(It is not relevant the exact tool for this discussion) previous there were a lot of home made widgets that functioned similarily, but I made a professional one that was useful and durable enough that several companies are now producing and making them. I initially made a few bucks on it,and that was it, I recovered my costs basically and still own several of the first run, and have used them in *real* work, which was the original idea. I benefited initially from just borrowing a home made cob job example of the tool, then greatly improving on itwith my meagre 'developer" skills. But the design, etc, I just threw out to the world, no patents, copyrights, nuthin, just dumped it, free, because I understand having better tools is a good idea for the people who use to