What OSS Programs are Still Needed?

suso asks: "I was thinking yesterday about how much open source software is out there already. Most categories are filled, but I wonder about what pieces of software still need to be written. What programs would you like to see in OSS form that are currently not available?"

Comments

DRM

[sevinkey]

Need a reliable open source DRM solution that can be proven trustworthy so we can finally have pay content that's not platform dependent.

If you can build a linux box for $70 and call it a linksys router, then with a OSS DRM you should be able to create the equivalent of MCE2005 for $250.

Re:DRM

[finkployd]

DRM is a fundamentally flawed concept. The only implementations of it that exist involve basically turning the concept of public key cryptography upside down. Giving someone a private key with which to decrypt data but then trying to prevent the user from ever coming in contact with that key is just silly.

The way it is SUPPOSED to work is the owner of the key is the only one who controls it and nobody else ever comes in contact with it. The way DRM is supposed to work is by having the content producers control what you can and cannot do with your own private key, and try to keep it from you.

This is why DRM (in its current form) is so easily (and constantly) broken and also why it will never work in an OSS implementation. Even strong proponants of DRM (you can find them at the Digital Identity World conference pontificating about how great DRM will be for the computer industry) admit that someone will be able to break it, they just want to keep everyone from breaking it. Of course once one person breaks it it and unencumbered media is released, then it is all over anyway.

Finkployd

Database

[adam mcmaster]

I hate to say this, but a database frontend that's as good as MS Access would be nice - there are attempts at such applications currently in development, but nothing that's even close to usable.

Re:Database

[Rysc]

There are two theoeries as to why Access is bad:

1) It's DB engine is primative and a joke making all databases created for it fundamentally inferior.

2) It dumbs down databases making DBAs annoyed that their boss' can say "My 12 year old sun threw together a database that works fine in 20 minutes! Why am I paying you?"

The first argument is the only one which is good. You do NOT want to use a technically inferior DB.

The second argument is NOT good. For some people, for some things, you really do not need a DBA. The fact that people CAN build databases without really understanding them is not fundamentally bad, it's an empowerment and fundamentally good... so long as it is understood (as, of course, it some times will not be) that a DB designed by an amature in a WYZIWYG DB app is not the same as a DB designed by a professional, just as some kids VB bitmap editor is not Photoshop.

Free software, in my view, is ultimately about empowerment: My ability to do more. Not necessarily without knowing more, but without spending more, and without being forced to do it someone else's way. To empower more people it can be necessary to allow for people to do more while knowing the same or less (see some aspects of the GNOME philosophy of late). That isn't bad, in fact it's definitively good.

So, just as a WYZIWYG html editor is not bad just because FrontPage blows, a GUI database designer is not bad just because Access blows.

A Simple, End-User Oriented Database

[Dragonmaster Lou]

Something along the lines of Access (though with a better DB engine that Access), FileMaker, Paradox, etc., would be nice.

It should use local files (so you don't need to have a server running, although that could be an option) and have an easy to use form layout system. I don't want to have to administer a database daemon, and I don't want to have to have to hand-hack code for a simple database.

I have mucked around for a while looking for something like this. The closest I've seen in Rekall, but it looks like it still needs to hook up to an external database of some kind, as best as I can tell.

QuarkXPress/InDisign replacement

[rekrutacja]

DTP on linux is simply impossible. Scribus doesn't work (yet?) for most of us...

clarity

[elliotj]

oss needs clarity. think about the mac. everything is immediately obvious to the end user. apps are sensibly named, things make sense. look at .net on windows. again, this is an easy to understand system.

oss is great, but since it's a voluntary collaboration, things are named after inside jokes or poor conventions. the "k"rap naming of kde stuff for example. or "vi", "gawk", "sed" etc. come on.

I know this will be flamed, but I think some kind of clarity council should be setup to provide consistency and simplicity across applications, tools and platforms. with a bit of this kind of organization, linux could really make a dent on the desktop, and new developers and users wouldn't face such a high barrier to entry.

Re:Collaborative calendar app...

[acaird]

I agree and am suprised that no one else mentioned this. We have decent (not great, but passable) word processors and spreadsheet programs. Good web browsers. Very good networking and server level stuff. But when people talk about why they use Windows, it's because of Outlook and the calendar. If there was a "firefox" of calendaring it would be really nice. It's more than a client though (unless you can manage to get Exchange calendaring working), so you have to get the server, and it has to operate with the huge MS Outlook base out there.
So, um, good luck.
.