Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Is Open Source Different In Europe Than In the US?

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the i-hear-gravity-is-heavier-over-there-too dept.

An anonymous reader writes "The first Europe Open Source Think Tank just concluded and Larry Augustin posted some interesting observations on open source in Europe versus the US. Essentially, he says that users in Europe care more about the open source nature of a product than do US users. US users are just trying to save a buck while European users actually care about access to the source code. Do Slashdot readers observe the same thing? Are the reasons for using open source software different in other parts of the world as well?"

51 of 399 comments (clear)

  1. For shame by illuminum · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Are we Americans really this stupid on this many levels?

    1. Re:For shame by sadgoblin · · Score: 0, Insightful

      Stupid? I dont think so. Selfish? Hell yes.

    2. Re:For shame by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Are we Americans really this stupid on this many levels?

      We elected Bush. Twice. Yeah, I'd say we are. Ugh.

    3. Re:For shame by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      Are we Americans really this stupid on this many levels?

      Yes you are.

    4. Re:For shame by johannesg · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Primary reason for adopting Open Source:
      -(Europe) Avoid vendor lock-in.
      -(US) Cost.

      ...because let's be brutally honest here: the US cares less about sending money to Redmond, Seattle than Europe does. For Europe it means a loss of value on the continent, but for the US the money stays 'at home', and contributes to local jobs, taxes, etc.

      So yes, Europe cares about Open Source in a different way than the US. It might very well be the only way that serious software development in Europe can compete with the US...

    5. Re:For shame by msuarezalvarez · · Score: 2, Insightful

      -(Europe) Avoid vendor lock-in.

      Except, you DO get vendor lock-in with FOSS, because you can't use anything EXCEPT FOSS.

      I do not know what FOSS software you are using, and under what license, but I do not think I have ever used FOSS software whose license included the condition of never using anything but FOSS.

      Also, in the US, companies are more interested in reliability- hence why they will BUY commercial software when there are "free" alternatives.

      Do you really believe Europeans are less interested in reliability?

    6. Re:For shame by Dragonslicer · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Also, in the US, companies are more interested in reliability

      You misspelled "liability".

    7. Re:For shame by jellomizer · · Score: 1, Insightful

      In America we call that Lazy, Elitists, who do not contribute positive to the overall society. (there is more to the world then just source code)

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    8. Re:For shame by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      A loss of money to the continent? Who the hell thinks of Europe as a single financial entity. Where the money is going is the last thing that anyone ever thinks about.

    9. Re:For shame by somersault · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Your first paragraph makes no sense. If it were true, then things would be the other way round - Europe would be worried a lot more about the cost of software than vendor lock in. As it is, if this article is correct it means that Americans don't care about feeding money into their economy, they only want stuff to be free and don't care as much if there is vendor lock-in. While Europeans are happy to pay money to American companies as long as it means they have a choice.

      It's also pretty funny that you somehow think American software is magically superior to any equivalent software coded in Europe, unless that software is open source? Games perhaps aren't "serious software" but they tend to require more serious coding skills than developing other commercial client-side software, and there are plenty of talented European and Asian development houses. I don't know a lot of commercial office software, but how about SAGE?

      Sure, most big software houses have their headquarters in the US, and Europe is the home of Linux and a lot of good open source apps. But look back again at your quote, and you could see that is because the US cares about money, and Europe cares about encouraging innovation and giving people good products. It is not necessarily because Europeans somehow can't code good code unless they are doing it for free.

      --
      which is totally what she said
    10. Re:For shame by Bat+Country · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This just in: Americans like money

      Seriously, why is this surprising to anyone? In the US of A it's always been about the bottom line, at least as far back as the railroads. We're a country which, culturally speaking, wants to get something for nothing, be totally financially independent and not have to work particularly hard to either get on top or stay there once we get there.

      So naturally, the first thing we look at is cost - we can pay $1500 per seat for all of our software, or get free alternatives for about half the stuff. We're wired like that. Maybe we're not all so cavalier about it or proud of the idea, but, uh, let's reverse the situation from reality to prove a point. Show of hands, anybody born and raised in the USA:

      Who would pay extra for a product which came with the source code if you could get closed source freeware which did the same thing?

      I don't see anywhere in the article that they bother giving numbers on preference or who in "Europe" they were talking to. Speaking purely in terms of cultural mindset diversity, saying "Europeans" is rather like saying "Asians..." Not particularly illuminating. Depending on what part of Europe you're talking about, you may be talking about a much smaller, far more technically savvy populace who have been programming since they were 10 or 11. Of course access to the source would be important to them. But that's not to say that if they had to pay to get the source, they'd necessarily still consider it a bargain.

      The question isn't one of greed, it's of expertise and interest.

      --
      The land shall stone them with the bread of his son.
    11. Re:For shame by sickboy1969c · · Score: 5, Insightful

      In America we call that Lazy, Elitists, who do not contribute positive to the overall society. (there is more to the world then just source code)

      Your hardworking, salt of the earth capitalists have really contributed a lot of positive things to your society. Hmmm, USD 10 billion a day in Iraq or USD 700 billion to bail out Wall St etc but not a dime for affordale socialised medicine... give me lazy elitism any day!

    12. Re:For shame by xaxa · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No, From TFA

      Primary reason for adopting Open Source:
      -(Europe) Avoid vendor lock-in.
      -(US) Cost.

      Open Source doesn't stop vendor lock in. You decide to base your infrastructure on Open Source Products it is just as expensive to switch what ever standard then it would with a closed source app.

      I don't think you know the difference between 'vendor' and 'standard'. If the code is open source, but I'm fed up dealing with Red Hat, I can ask Small Local Company to continue the project.
      FWIW, the standard is also open. It's much easier to convert between two open standards than between a closed one and an open one, and you can choose any software company to write the code to do it.

      You have a Linux infrastructure and you find that it doesn't do what you need it to do anymore, however a windows network does.

      That's not open source, and it isn't open standards either. I'd bet converting from a Linux system to a Solaris system is much easier than from Linux to Microsoft.

      If you spend millions on a Linux Infrastructure you are stuck on Linux.

      Why? Everything is open, so stuff developed by Sun can work with no problems.

      The problem is the Europeans are looking at their side with full vision and the American side with stereotype blinders.

      The story could do with a Flamebait tag.

      They Either see us a Cowboys or NYC Business men. While the truth Americans a diverse group of people spreading a large area, with many sub cultures in our own.

      I'm going to laugh. It's what I'm meant to do on /., right?

    13. Re:For shame by LaughingCoder · · Score: 2, Insightful

      but not a dime for affordale socialised medicine...

      Huh? Have you ever hear of Medicare and Medicaid and the new presriription drug plan, and SCHIP? These are all huge federal programs that spend vast sums of money on socialized medicine.

      --
      The more you regulate a company, the worse its products become.
    14. Re:For shame by sidyan · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The people that make the rules?
      * European Central Bank
      * European Parliament
      * European Commission

      There's a mighty lot of thinking going on between those three...

    15. Re:For shame by m.ducharme · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Sorry, but it's not elitist for the middle class to be paid fair value for their work, and to be able to enjoy the fruits of their own labours.
      This idea that your primary function in society is to make other people richer (because this is what you're doing when you work harder for the same pay) is distinctly North American. Europeans don't look down on us because they think we're inherently inferior, they look down on us because we go around with "sucker" written on our heads, and let a small, elite minority take advantage of us.

      --
      Rule of Slashdot #0: You and people like you are not representative of the larger population. - A.C.
    16. Re:For shame by ZTiger · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'd agree that most American's are workaholics. I work for a multinational company and our IT guy that does site installations always comments on how he rushes to get through an installation while the Euro guys are looking at him like he is crazy because he will stay at work 12 hours while he is there. We have a good laugh when he went to Spain and they were gone for 2 hours in the afternoon and came back with alcohol on their breath. I wonder how a 24x7 IT shop that has business critical systems compares between America and Europe?

    17. Re:For shame by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      true. but they're for sure not elite nor, i'm afraid, are they a minority...for me, as an european, it is really scary to watch the u.s. drifting into some kind of dark age. not that i'm not aware of the fact that it always worked like that, but now it's no scandal anymore if guys like bush and cheney are at power. pretty scary vultures if you ask me. not that it'd be all roses in europe, but we not into war at the moment. nobody (besides some weapon industry lobbyists maybe) beliefs here in the benefits of militant actions. a true mess you're into now. i hope you manage somehow to reinvent your ideals - independence and freedom not oppression. the hole case, by the way, reminds me of rome. a nation which could just bear it's inner tensions through a steady militant expansion, but i guess these times are gone forever.

    18. Re:For shame by pembo13 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That would be, ironically, very American of them if that is what they did.

      --
      "Thanks for all the money you paid to us. We've used it to buy off ISO among other things" -Microsoft
    19. Re:For shame by Hurricane78 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's very impressive, how your leaders brainwashed you into confusing lazyness with the freedom of leisure instead of being a slave of a company, and seeing elitism (like in, being the best) as something bad.

      Well... It's your life. If you want to be a Joe Slave, so be it.
      But as soon as those that take advantage of you in this way endanger us too, you're putting me in danger by supporting them. And that's where I have a problem with you.
      Luckily I see it as the best, to help you, instead of punishing you.

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
  2. The influence of perception software marketing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I did enjoy this set of observations, but must disagree with some of the conclusions.

    Under "Software Sales Model" he states:

            "The direct model doesn't seem to be widely excepted here [Europe]."

    and then goes on to speculate

            "Perhaps it's because the VARs and SIs in Europe are more heavily invested in Open Source than they are in the US."

            I disagree with the speculative part. To support my thinking, another quote:

    Under "Open Source Business Models"

            "Support and service subscription models clearly dominated the thinking among the Europeans here at OSTT. This contrasts with our thinking in the US that services models are not scalable and that the models should be product based."

            For me, those observed perceptions actually lead to the Europeans needing more stringent care about your vendor's model. Basically, if you're going to rely on someone else for support and service, you have to be very cautious about "not getting locked in." If you're buying your product like Lego blocks and supporting it yourself, from the great single-piece-leggo-auction-free-for-all, then you are free to choose the occasional Duplo block, if it solves your problem, and if you find you have too many of them, you can replace them later, because in this case you buyer is taking on more of the role of the solution-archtitecht.

            I get to see both methods work. In my work place we buy lots of RedHat support licenses for our commercial endeavors and enjoy it's tremendous stability as a platform. In my home computing life, when I need a software widget, I click freshmeat first, try to find the open source version of something, Paypal the author $10 if it's nicely done, but if none of them suit my needs, then I'll try shareware next, and (if I'm desperate) commercial software last. This model gets the job done, and I don't believe it's any less-healthy to the software world.

  3. Primary vs Secondary by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I use Open Source for two reasons ....

    I like Open Source ideals (free, as in speech)
    I like Open Source results (free as in beer)

    I also live in the US, so please categorize me correctly in the "save money" column, until I move to Europe, when you should categorize me in the other column.

    This isn't an XOR problem, so who cares which is "more important", especially when the result for using Open Source is the same either way?

    --
    Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    1. Re:Primary vs Secondary by Otter · · Score: 5, Insightful

      For me, the biggest benefit is avoiding license hassles. Saving money and "yuo have teh sorce code so fix it yuorself" are both great also, but take a back seat to being able to just stick an install CD into another machine without having to worry about licensing.

      --
      What I'm listening to now on Pandora...
    2. Re:Primary vs Secondary by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Because if the primary reason for using open source software is to save money, it is easy for a proprietary vendor to try and gain an edge in a particular market by lowering or eliminating their acquisition price and focusing on service contracts. There is nothing inherent to open source that guarantees that it will cost less to buy than proprietary code, nor is there anything inherent to open source that guarantees that the long term costs will be less than with proprietary code. Some of the most stable, reliable software platforms on Earth are proprietary -- z/VM, VMS, etc.

      When the primary reason is to remain free from vendor lock-in, or to have the freedom to modify the code as needed, or the freedom to redistribute the code as needed, then it becomes much harder for proprietary vendors to compete.

      --
      Palm trees and 8
    3. Re:Primary vs Secondary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes, and also if you want to try new software it makes it much easier. Simply download it and go ahead. No need to worry whether you have some restricted trial version. And if you decide to use it, you don't need to care about getting the paperwork done for getting the money (which might not apply widely, but where I am this is a big hassle, and from "Hey we should use it" to "Hey the package has been delivered" usually 3 months pass by).

    4. Re:Primary vs Secondary by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "There is nothing inherent to open source that guarantees that it will cost less to buy than proprietary code"

      This is 100% false. Even if the proprietary code supplier gives code away, the support costs are set by the proprietary source vendor, not by open market. With Open Source, one can change support vendors or even grow your own support at any time. Vendor lockin is a cost, even if the actual cost is less up front, it rarely is long term.

      And that is just for Source Code support. Now, lets talk about data lockin and now we're really adding to the long term costs.

      I currently manage a system that has YEARS of data locked in a proprietary format, and the software just plain sucks. But there is no easy (ie "cheap") way to move to another vendor at this point. So, we are stuck, until it becomes too painful to live with.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
  4. well, DUH by Shivetya · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Americans have always had more choices and as such were not as dependent on needing an alternative. One thing that shocked me was how much my brother in law pays for the same exact software down under. I can see it in pricing on a lot of things.

    America had several advantages, a larger number of people united by one language and culture with open borders for a longer time. The free movement of ideas has no limits when it came to states but country lines are a whole 'nuther thing. Plus, how long has it been since all the checkpoints have been removed?

    Same idea, with freedom being offered comes the orgy effect... you can't get enough

    --
    * Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
  5. Get real by wigaloo · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Oh, good grief.

    Free Software, and its ideals, essentially originated in the US. Most of the big projects have too.

    Nothing to see here, move along.

    1. Re:Get real by boteeka · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That is true indeed. Also corporatist software development companies (like Microsoft) originated from the US too. Also, the internet is originated from the US. It is also true that all of them are declining in the US.

    2. Re:Get real by wigaloo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      How can this factual post be modded -1 troll? It is a clear case of moderator abuse if I ever saw one. My posting history shows that I do not troll.

      So, what is the agenda here? Why suppress consideration that Free Software and most of the big F/OSS projects originated in the US? I'm not even from the US, yet it is plain obvious to me the enormous contribution that has been made by the likes of RMS, linus, etc in fostering awareness of the source-code access issue.

    3. Re:Get real by BrentH · · Score: 2, Insightful

      OpenOffice is germna btw, the former StarOffice. Then again, contributions for all those projects come from all over te world, so why would the instigator of the project dictate the nationality of the project?

  6. Not just open source, _freedom_! by Bromskloss · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Open source is good and well, but you also want the freedom to use your software as you wish and distribute your derivative works. Having access to the source code doesn't automatically grant you that. That's why we want free software.

    --
    Swedish plasma phys. PhD student; MSc EE; knows maths, programming, electronics; finance interest; seeks opportunities
  7. I'd be curious about this. by filesiteguy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I (a Californian) use OSS at home and at work simply because it is better than most of the closed-source offerings. I also prefer open source so that I know what is running the application, or at least know more than a few eyes are looking through it. I feel it is more secure that way.

    I'd be happy to pay for OSS if needed. I do pay for my openSUSE versions and Crossover Office.

    --
    The Kai's Semi-Updated Website Thingy
  8. Gee not a little biased. by LWATCDR · · Score: 3, Insightful

    A study from Europe says Europeans get it while people in the US don't?
    I loved the bit on dual licensing. I first heard about dual licensing when I started to hear about KDE. QT and MySQL both where dual licensed and one was from Europe and the other from Australia.
    Give me a freaking break.

    --
    See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
  9. why by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    If americans care less it's probably because it's "actually" less important for them. The software business like most high technology is dominated by the US. This means that US companies are closer and more responsive to US customers. However, foreign users have to deal with "ported" software that is not initially targeted to them. This lack of control and consideration causes problems for them.

    So obviously they'd like to be at the center of the software they use.

    Open source can bring them closer or at the very least allow them to take code that is mostly what they want and tailor it to their precise needs.

    However, it will not allow them to move the center from the centers of the high tech industry. Open source, regardless of who supports it will remain largely driven by forces in the most industrialized and highly 'technological' centers in the world. Thus unless something changes in europe or the US... the center will probably still fall on the US at least for now.

  10. Working for an American Firm by saterdaies · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Working for an American firm, I find that cost is usually the deciding factor.

    This drives me nuts! I'm not much of an open-source fanatic, but I've found that every time we buy an expensive piece of enterprise software, we've been sold huge expectations with little follow through. For example, we recently bought a product and we asked the company whether it worked with Firefox and Safari. They assured us that they had plenty of customers using it with those two browsers. So, we plunk down my yearly salary for the product and a support contract and low-and-behold not only doesn't the site work, it actually displays an error message saying you must use IE6.

    Now, this presented problems for me since we have a bunch of Mac users who couldn't use it for lack of IE6. Now those users are set up to use a Windows remote desktop solution for it.

    Basically, that proprietary software simply makes my life harder. We look at open-source solutions and we get a good idea of what we'd have to do if we used it which is always more than what a company claims we'll have to do with their system that just handles things automagically for everything! In the end, I have to spend more time on the proprietary system we paid big bucks for.

    1. Re:Working for an American Firm by characterZer0 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Do not pay for something that you have not tested.

      Put the requirements in the contract.

      --
      Go green: turn off your refrigerator.
  11. If it's mission critical... by torsner · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I collegue of mine with an excellent track record as IT and R&D manager in the European Call Center industry once said (and I agree):

    - "if the application is mission critical, then we need the source"

  12. Question by Enter+the+Shoggoth · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Would it have anything to do with the fact that the biggest software shops are Bangalore based?

    There! Fixed that for you

    --
    Andy Warhol got it right / Everybody gets the limelight
    Andy Warhol got it wrong / Fifteen minutes is too long.
  13. Re:We're broke! by megamerican · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Haven't you seen the news? We need all the bucks we can get!

    It's actually quite the opposite. We've printed too many.

    --
    If you have something that you dont want anyone to know, maybe you shouldnt be doing it in the first place -Eric Schmidt
  14. It disturbs me... by east+coast · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What bothers me the most about all of this is that in this day and age we're still finding communal efforts of this nature being divided by geography. Just goes to show that the function hasn't followed the form.

    You may call it bragging rights, I call it a lack of vision.

    --
    Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
  15. Eh, I agree by gravis777 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think that in the US, the mass population that is, NOT the IT crowd, likes Open Source because they are trying to save money. The perfect example of this is Open Office. Let me tell you, my mom, pastor, sister, and my best friend all could care less if they had access to the source code. I would be shocked if a single one of them could program "Hello World". However, they LOVE the thought of not shelling out a couple of Hundred bucks to Microsoft. Not because they hate Microsoft, but because they want to save money. The sister I mentioned earlier also just graduated graphic arts school, and is a Gimp user, not because she has access to the source code or anything like that, but because it is free.

    I pieced together a few computers for a church before, and we went Linux with Open Office, once again, because its free.

    None of these were because they thought Linux, Open Office, or Gimp were better, in fact, all of these people would have prefered the pay program. People like free. People will do stupid stuff to get stuff for free. You know how many users I had to remove spyware and viruses from because they tried installing free 3D or Living Screensavers, 1000 free smilies at smily central, or animated coursers? In fact, I have tons of friend's myspace pages that I refuse to goto until they clean up their code and get rid of all those evil ActiveX and JavaScript controls.

    You ought too see how many people will drive 30-45 miles across town to save 20 cents a gallon on gas. I point and laugh at those people.

    Yet, not a single one of these people mind paying $18 for a pizza, $24.95 a month for dialup, or $120 a month for their cable bill.

  16. Holy FUD Batman! by Facetious · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I make it a point to ignore Anonymous Cowards, but holy crap! That is one of the most blatantly false pieces of FUD I've seen in some time. To wit:

    you DO get vendor lock-in with FOSS, because you can't use anything EXCEPT FOSS.

    That's an oldie but a goodie and completely untrue. It hails back to some really ancient anti-GPL FUD (think Bill Gates and "viral" licensing).

    in the US, companies are more interested in reliability- hence why they will BUY commercial software when there are "free" alternatives.

    It couldn't have anything to do with the power of marketing over the simple minds of PHBs? Or the FUDspinners like you? Or ignorance of FOSS alternatives?

    ask any company about the nightmare of going from OpenSQL to a real SQL database. Not only is it insanely difficult, but the FOSS alternative is vastly inferior.

    What the hell is OpenSQL? Is it a fork of MySQL or PostgreSQL? And surely by "real SQL" you don't mean MS's pitiful SQL Server?

    But hey, if you'd rather have source code than a product which works well, more power to ya. Most people just don't consider work time to be play time, that's all I'm sayin'.

    You assume FOSS doesn't work well. It works great, thank you very much. Most people consider putting well built, peer reviewed software in place a huge time and money saver, but if you prefer to wait on hold for tech support for your favorite piece of payware, more power to ya'.

    I know, I know. Don't feed the trolls.

    --
    Let us not become the evil that we deplore.
    1. Re:Holy FUD Batman! by Mista2 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's like skype compared to Gizmo Project. With skype, do you know where your phone call is going, do you know if there is a US back door into the protocol? Can you encrypt it? GizmoProject just uses SIP, a well understood phone protocol with many open libraries, and therefore can also potentially use PGP encrypted SIP. It is an open source app, and can be used to tie into many other IM systems, MSN, jabber based IMs like Yahoo,etc Oh, and there are no restrictions if you happen to use a non MS OS or a non Intel CPU. You can get a phone client for symbian, PalmOS and windows Mobile (I don't know if thy will do one for iPhone given the closed nature of it's API's) To me thats a classic open source over proprietary example.

  17. Bad Expensive Software by Cassini2 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So, we plunk down my yearly salary for the product and a support contract and low-and-behold not only doesn't the site work, it actually displays an error message ... Basically, that proprietary software simply makes my life harder.

    Often the more expensive the piece of software is, the worse the software is. It is a perverse example of applied economics. Expensive software sells in small volumes, so the vendors try to maximize profit per customer. Effectively, this means minimizing effort in software development, resulting in crappy software.

    Companies selling large volumes of software, find technical support costs a large cost center. This forces the companies to increase software quality and increase ease of use, even if only to reduce technical support costs. However, to achieve the volumes of sales, these same companies often reduce the unit price of the software. High-volume software vendors are trying to maximize the formula: revenue = unit cost * # of sales. Thus most high-volume titles cost much less than the more expensive low-volume titles, and are also better quality pieces of software.

    Open source takes things to an extreme. The software is free, the source is free, so the number of users is large. The number of bug fixes will also be large, if the number of developers scales with the number of users. Of course, the number of developers on an open-source project is a function of both revenue and the number of bugs, and with open source projects, revenue is a key issue. Nevertheless, some open source projects have identified revenue streams, and are good quality projects.

    The end result is expensive software is usually crappy, and cheaper software is often better.

  18. how is FOSS "free, as in speech"? by pbhj · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What does OSS have to do with "free, as in speech". OSS is not about avoiding government censorship (is it?) it's free /libre/, free to use and abuse, free to modify, free to alter and adapt, free to better for your needs or those of others ... I don't see how that has anything to do with "free, as in speech"?

    I'm guessing that in Europe people like FOSS because it's free-libre and free-gratis, whilst in America the populous doesn't know what "libre" means [oh God I hope I spelt it right!] and so make some weird analogy with free speech that misses the mark entirely. Surely "free, as in speech" would be for warez that can't be sold legally but can be given away due to some loophole?

    But I'm open to being wrong.

    Seriously though can't we just all agree to use libre and gratis?

    [Ya, probably flamebait, but everyone loves a barbecue, right?!]

  19. Re:Say what? by erroneus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...and some people have a problem with understanding what a generalization is... which, once again, appears to point to another common U.S. American failing -- the notion that it is all about "me" somehow.

    The 80's was probably one of the most damaging eras for the U.S. where culture and society are concerned. "Looking out for number one" is a ridiculously selfish notion that has resulted in making "everyone else" a competitor or even an enemy of sorts.

    There are indeed a lot of people who do not neatly fall into the category I describe. But, the masses are what I speak... the masses to which that marketers very successfully appeal.

  20. Re:EU Attitudes In General Are Different by Colonel+Korn · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Ok, I guess you have a point.

    I'm a French PhD student working in a German research center, and I just happened to see your post during working hours :D

    Most American PhD students don't have working hours. This is misleading, though, as while timing is extremely flexible, students are basically expected to be "working" or at least present in the lab 12 hours a day, 7 days a week.

    --
    "I zero-index my hamsters" - Willtor (147206)
  21. Re:Cultural Differences by h2o2 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    2) favor process over results (whereas we Americans favor results over process)

    While this may or may not be true on a case by case basis, it helps to understand that this is usually not done for its own sake. Results don't matter that much if you don't know how or why you achieved them, or if you cannot create them repeatably. I guess this ties into the "longer view" aspect.

  22. Re:EU Attitudes In General Are Different by jbeaupre · · Score: 3, Insightful

    A corollary, supported by some studies, is that Americans tend to enjoy work more. The accomplishment plus the socialization. Different strokes for different folks.

    --
    The world is made by those who show up for the job.
  23. Re:I agree by Yetihehe · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Perhaps if there was one (honest) group that accepted donations, then passed them out to open source groups that were registered with them, I would be more inclined to give regular donations.

    We could even call them OSIAA (Open Source Indystry Association of America). They could maybe sue some people who distribute OSS in inappropriate ways...

    --
    Extreme Programming - Redundant Array of Inexpensive Developers