05.26.08
Posted in FLOSS, Industry News at 0:22 by lnxwalt
Suddenly, a flurry of OOXML-ODF related news « CyberTech Rambler
Fourth. We may in fact, never see a full implementation of ISO OOXML. Microsoft already said that it will support ODF 1.1, not ISO ODF (version 1.0). That is a correct technical decision, since ODF 1.1 is the norm today. Superimpose this tread of thinking on to OOXML and what do you get? Microsoft not implementing ISO OOXML, but a later, “enhanced” version which they dictate the development of. To critics who says this will not happen, let me remind you that ISO OOXML support is still an raincheck. We know that the earliest posible date is in two years time, i.e. 2010. Do you really believe that Microsoft Office format will stay stagnant at ISO OOXML for the two years??? I put my money on Microsoft Office in 2010 saving in the “updated” OOXML format, with the ability to save to ISO OOXML. When that comes true, every other office suite will still be in the same situation as they are today: forever playing catch up.
Lastly, to those who says OOXML is needed urgently, therefore we should sacrifice quality for speed, you just had egg on your face. The urgency is so strong that we can wait till 2010. Yeah!
CyberTech Rambler always has some interesting insights on the OOXML / Ecma 376 / ISO 29500 situation. I recommend reading his blog along with mine, Rob Weir’s, Andy Updegrove’s, and Pamela Jones’s. Others to read include Arnaud Le Hors and Bob Sutor.
For pro-OOXML propaganda, I recommend Brian Jones, Doug Mahugh, and Jason Matusow. Just recognize that they are constrained by their employer and so cannot speak their true minds. For example, Jason often states that he’s always against technology mandates, but if the mandate was that software used had to faithfully interpret and preserve compatibility with files used by an agency’s existing (Microsoft) software, I sincerely doubt that he’d oppose that. Rick Jelliffe’s posts on XML.com are another excellent read, once you understand that he is still sore about being branded as a wiki-editing prostitute by some overzealous OOXML opponents.
When ODF was being created at OASIS, Microsoft chose to let things go without their input. The knew that it was meant as a vendor-neutral open format that could be easily implemented by office applications suites. So why did they wait? Because their secret weapon has always been their file formats. Truthfully, nearly all of the important functionality in an office suite was already present in 1997. Very little has been added since then, other than bundling some other applications with the suite. The reason that MS Office has been used so widely is because only their product fully-understood their file formats. If you use Word and I use WordPerfect, there will always be little variations in the way the products render documents using Word’s file format. They saw ODF as just another attempt to dethrone them. If the product that runs on 90% of computers does not support the format, it will just die, they must have reasoned. But it did not turn out that way.
It turned out that the timing was right for ODF. Governments and end-users were tiring of having a single vendor for their software. They wanted vendor neutrality in their file formats and in their network protocols. They also wanted open standards, so they did not have to fear the wrath of patent-holders’ legal departments for accessing their own data. The wanted choice, not of file formats, but of vendors and products that use those formats. This is what ODF offers. OpenDocument Format (ODF, ISO 26300) is designed primarily for use by multiple vendors (althoug some claim that OpenOffice.org specific markup still exists within the format). ODF is mostly compatible with existing standards, so there is already a lot of experience with implementing parts of the standard. ODF has multiple implementations, including some that are completely independent. Once ODF went through the ISO-ification process, Microsoft suddenly realized that there are some areas (such as Europe) where laws may require governments to prefer ISO standards.
As a result, Microsoft sent their then-proprietary XML formats (dubbed Office Open XML [OOXML, sometimes called OpenXML]) through Ecma for standardization, with a target of getting the ISO seal of approval. In a contentious process that was far too short for the kind of detailed examination and changing that was needed, ISO recently approved OOXML as a standard, pending the disposition of a recent challenge. They have opened up considerably, although there are still some challenges for outside implementers of the formats.
The goal of the MS 2007 formats, as well as OOXML to some degree, is to prevent you and your business from having a choice of applications to use in creating, modifying, and reading your data. If you are locked-in by file format incompatibilities, you will not normally be willing to endure the pain of conversion to a competing product, even if that product fits your needs better. This also enables MSFT to charge higher prices, which leads to higher profits, which enables them to continue to subsidize their money-losing MSN / Live and XBox / Zune businesses. Their eventual goal, in my estimation, is to have an intravenous line into your wallet. It is only a slight exaggeration to say that they want to have you so dependent on Microsoft that you buy Microsoft-branded underwear because no one else makes undergarments compatible with the software that operates your chair.
The important thing for you to know is this: Microsoft’s Office 2007 does not support ISO standardized OOXML, and will not until at least 2010. Your .docx / .xlsx / .pptx documents are now in a doomed format that may shortly be unreadable by most software. Likewise for the corresponding macro-containing formats. If you care about continued access to your data, do not save in MS 2007 formats. Use the older .doc / .xls / .ppt formats, or even better, use ODF formats (.odt / .ods / .odp). If necessary, install the Sun plug-in (NOT the CleverAge plug-in) to enable support for ODF in your Microsoft Office software. (Unfortunately, there is not a Mac version of Sun’s plug-in yet.)
For your SLOB (small, locally-owned business), OMB (owner-managed business), or FOB (family-owned business), you might be better off holding onto what you have for a while and whenever you have to upgrade or replace a computer, going with Sun’s commercially-licensed StarOffice product (or the related open source licensed OpenOffice.org product). If you really prefer MS Office 2007, wait until SP2 is released next year, so you will have some level of ODF support built-in (and also PDF saving, the most requested feature in my workplace). Or you may want to check out IBM Lotus Symphony, which has a similar interface (like MS Office 2007, I can never find the functions I want).
Permalink
05.15.08
Posted in FLOSS, News and Announcements, Political, Society at 1:01 by lnxwalt
Standards attorney Andy Updegrove announced the creation of the Hague Declaration recently. The Hague Declaration is a statement of human rights on the Internet. But it is more. Without being overly verbose about it, the Declaration also promotes free software, where “free” is not about the price of the software, but about the freedom that the user of that software gains.
I want to encourage you to visit Mr. Updegrove’s blog to read his statement, and then to go to the site to sign the Hague Declaration. As a follow up, write your elected representatives to encourage them to require government agencies to use vendor-neutral, open standard file formats, such as ODF.
Permalink
03.11.08
Posted in FLOSS, Small Business at 3:13 by lnxwalt
Alfresco VP Matt Asay responds to an article in eCommerce Times.
He points out that SMBs should be using open source software, when it meets their needs, and that hosted software (SaaS) eliminates the need for the business’ owner and staffers to act as an IT department:
What could possibly be better for an SMB than not having to install software?
…
Fair enough. But what this doesn’t note (perhaps because the author doesn’t understand) is that just because you can access source code in open source doesn’t mean that you must. Most people don’t.
Even if an SMB elects not to modify source code, however, they still benefit by all those that do. Better code. More accountability from one’s vendor. Lower prices. These are just some of the benefits that are attendant on those that buy into open source, whether they’re a hacker or a surrogate of the hacker.
Which brings up the point: when you buy proprietary software, someone has to install it, configure it, customize it for your needs, and perform other administrative tasks from time to time. If the software has a failure, you are still on the phone, paying for support. You still have to search out online fora to find out how to fix your problem. So what is the advantage? It isn’t even always more polished than open source.
With FLOSS, someone has to install, configure, customize, and administer your software. Most of your support is free, from online fora, and many applications have a company where paid support can be obtained.
If you are approached by someone who wants to help you set up your business’ software, make sure that the person knows, uses, and supports FLOSS. Your setup doesn’t have to be only open software, but a significant part of what you use should be.
One other thing: Unlike what eCommerce Times wrote, No business should be installing or using Windows Vista. It is years away from being ready to use. Check out Mac OSX systems as well as Linux and BSD-based systems. If you are looking to buy computers, make sure that your vendors offer Mac and/or Linux systems.
From someone who supports Windows systems as his day job, trust me: you do not need the headache that is Windows Vista. If you must have Windows, buy only XP Professional.
Tags: SmallBusiness
Permalink
07.20.07
Posted in FLOSS at 3:44 by lnxwalt
Since I converted my own last remaining Windows machine to Linux, I have been continually amazed by the capabilities that I’m finding. There was a time when one of the big issues you had to deal with when you changed operating systems was compatibility with peripherals–cameras, graphics tablets, printers, sound equipment, scanners, even monitors–but for the most part, this is no longer true.
First of all, any decent product has drivers available for Windows, Mac OS X, and Linux. There is a chance that Linux emulation mode will allow BSD operating systems (FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD, DragonflyBSD) to utilize the Linux drivers or that the Mac OS X drivers will be usable. So most operating systems that people might want to actually use will be able to use the hardware.
Some companies don’t make drivers for Linux (and other FLOSS operating systems) and don’t release enough information about their products to allow someone else to write fully-functional drivers. Others may work if you are willing to do a lot of extra configuration. Still, most decent products by most companies work and work well.
Case in point: when I want a new laser mouse, I go to the nearest discount store and buy whatever is on sale. A co-worker of mine is still trying to get his new Vista computer to accept one of the mice he has bought. Someone else I talked to at work today is trying unsuccessfully to get his printer to work with his new Vista machine.
I just walked into a store and saw a digital camera for $99. Since I had not previously owned a digital camera, I went ahead and bought this Sanyo VPC-S600 6.0 megapixel camera. I snapped a few photos just to try it out.
I connected the camera to the laptop and *poof* I had a file manager window open with the images visible inside.
Typically, a Windows user runs the included installation CD, which installs drivers to enable the camera to work and also installs some really crappy image-editing software along with an “update manager” and sets it all to run in the background at startup, along with scattering icons (including the camera maker’s favored online image processing and image-sharing sites) all over the desktop. It turns out that most cameras do not need the included software–they’ll work in Windows with “My Computer” / Windows Explorer–but a few (especially a certain HP model I’ve had to deal with) do not. However, with the modern distributions of Linux, I have never seen a camera that needed any special software to work. They have all worked right away.
My point: Don’t be afraid to make the move to Ubuntu Linux, Linux Mint, OpenOffice.org, Fedora Linux, and other FLOSS products. They are every bit the equal and in some ways superior to their proprietary competition. If you’re hearing that open source software is inferior to proprietary commercial products, someone is lying to you. One of the best things you can do for your business is to require the use of free software and open source software products, along with open standard file formats and open standard network protocols whenever and wherever they suit your needs.
Does your operating system vendor, for example, treat you as a thief, running license verification software that calls home to the vendor every time you turn on your computer? Maybe you are using the wrong operating system. Does your office application vendor insert hidden tracking codes in the documents you work on? Maybe you are using the wrong office suite. Does your software vendor keep changing its file formats and network protocols so you have to keep buying new versions of the software? Maybe you need to look at software that does not come from that vendor.
Most important, fear not, your hardware mostly just works these days with a modern version of GNU+Linux.
Permalink
06.23.07
Posted in FLOSS, Small Business at 0:33 by lnxwalt
I have spent the past few days trying to get a co-worker’s new Toshiba laptop, powered by Microsoft’s Windows Vista, set up. Being over 2700 miles away from home (and even further for my co-worker), it is essential that the laptop works with the hotel’s WiFi network. While my Dell, powered by Linux Mint, works reliably, his does not.
Apparently, some of the changes that Microsoft made to their TCP/IP stack are incompatible with some implementations of DHCP. In simple English, if you buy a computer with Vista on it, you may need to buy new networking equipment in order for the computer to connect reliably.
After all of this–try this fix and try that fix, including registry fixes and temporarily disabling the built-in firewall–there is still not a reliable way to connect his computer to the wireless network (and from there to the larger Internet).
I am sure that Microsoft will have a permanent solution to this within a month or two. They are pretty intelligent people, so they know about the problem and are working on a solution for it. It is too bad that they felt the pressure to push it out the door unfinished.
Still, if you have a small business that uses networked computers, your best bet is to insist on Linux-powered computers and standardized network protocols and file formats. If your people spend a week or two in a hotel, unable to connect to the network (and hence, unable to reach your VPN), you may lose a substantial amount of productivity with those employees. Instead of throwing your company’s money into a giant corporation’s “one-point-oh quality” product, so that you can be free tester to help them work out the bugs, check out the polished Linux distributions that are available for the desktop / client.
In our country, we have seen that larger companies, as they gain power and influence, tend to turn it against their employees, their customers, their neighbors, their communities, and their smaller competitors. It becomes a game of trying to use their money and influence to benefit themselves while transferring all costs to the rest of society. Often, if society as a whole “spanks” a particular corporation, it decides to be a good citizen and good neighbor, at least for the next several years.
If you still want the Microsoft blessing, look at Xandros for the desktop. Xandros is a small Linux distributor that has signed a blessing agreement with Microsoft. If that is not important to you, or if you explicitly wish to avoid the “blessing,” take a look at Mint or Ubuntu or Fedora for the desktop. (For non-technical users, we recommend Mint or a Ubuntu-family [Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Edubuntu, Xubuntu] operating system.)
Permalink
05.19.07
Posted in FLOSS, Industry News, Legal Issues at 3:50 by lnxwalt
In ancient times, one of the weapons that soldiers used was the spear. The good thing about a spear is that it gave the ability to repeatedly hurt your enemy (enemies) before the enemy could get into sword range.
Microsoft is looking in its rearview mirror, terrified at the approaching juggernaut that is FLOSS. As more of the market uses FLOSS in place of proprietary software, Microsoft’s market share and profits are limited. Microsoft has been the leading software company for many years, so seeing competitors that are parrying their every thrust must loosen their sphincters. Now they have pulled out the equivalent of the nuclear bomb and said in effect, “We are willing to use this if you continue to threaten our dominance.”
I have read that eventually, it was learned that a sword-bearing soldier could beat a spear-bearing soldier more often than the reverse. That is, the victory comes up-close-and-personal, not from far away. I would caution Microsoft that using patents as weapons instead of building great customer-centric products is not the road to continued success. It is the road to slow death, like the one chosen by the Detroit automakers.
I believe that FLOSS is the future of software. This does not mean that proprietary software will die out. However, I believe that proprietary software is destined to become primarily a niche product. For one thing, the high margins that some software companies (including Microsoft) have received can not continue indefinitely. For another, things like TUR place the user’s interests underneath those of the vendor, which also can not continue indefinitely. Enlightened users will seek software from vendors that are less hostile to their own interests.
The knowledge that this is coming fills many of the proprietary companies with fear.
Disclaimer: This is my personal opinion only. It does not reflect the views of WebConnect Consulting or any employers, relatives, or anyone else.
Permalink
04.23.07
Posted in FLOSS, Small Business at 2:51 by lnxwalt
Many times, companies may wish to leave the dominant platform (that is, operating system, office suite, Web browser, and other associated software) because of such problems as spyware and virus/trojan/worm infections. At the same time, they may wish to continue to enable non-technical users to perform their duties. If this describes your company, we have two suggestions for you.
Let me note that these two suggestions are for non-technical users as well as technical users. Technical users should also consider three more options, which will be discussed later.
First, some assumptions:
- Reasonably new hardware, say a year or two old, with a Pentium 4 or equivalent processor running at 2 GHz or higher clock speed.
- At least 512 MB of RAM. These systems will run with 256 MB, but opening multiple applications at once can sometimes be slow.
- A technical person to help you get set up and to do occasional maintenance work on your systems. Obviously, it is always better if this person is internal to your company, because he or she is more likely to understand the particular challenges that your business faces. Likewise, he or she will have direct insight into exactly what software your users need in order to do their jobs effectively.
On to the recommended desktops:
Linux Mint is an easy-to-use Linux-powered desktop with Sun Java and Adobe Flash pre-installed. It comes with the Evolution e-mail & calendaring client installed. In my tests, it picks up the wireless card on my Dell XPS M140 notebook computer better than Windows does—I saw some nearby networks that I hadn’t picked up in almost a year. I was able to head over to YouTube and watch videos, listen to streaming audio feeds, and even view AOL video (which I had never before been able to see with my standard security settings).
With its GNU+Linux operating system and its customized GNOME desktop, Linux Mint is one of the best out-of-the-box experiences I have ever had. It gives the “WOW” that Windows Vista promises, without all of the anti-user and anti-purchaser stalkerware built into Vista. Linux Mint is so exciting that I may even make it my primary desktop.
If you have a Windows domain server and need your desktops to integrate with it, Xandros is the desktop for you. It easily integrates with Active Directory and domain controllers, PPTP VPNs, and can run both OpenOffice.org and Microsoft Office software. Xandros is all business, including the ability to install Internet Explorer 6 and run some ActiveX controls. Switching to Xandros is relatively painless for small-scale conversions and pilot projects. As the number of desktops involved increases, it is worthwhile to get the network control tools they offer.
This one has a little bit of configuration involved. This is not difficult, and is roughly comparable to the configuration needed for using Windows 2000 in the same situation.
Linux Mint uses the same software packaging system as the Debian and Ubuntu families of GNU+Linux operating systems. In fact, Mint is based on Ubuntu. Linux Mint’s desktop places the taskbar in the familiar bottom of the desktop, as opposed to the top (common on GNOME-based desktops such as Ubuntu and Fedora) and removes the multiple desktops feature to make it more familiar to Windows users. Xandros is also a Debian-based operating system, but has packages certified for corporate use available from the Xandros corporate servers for paid subscribers. Xandros now features 3D desktops.
Linux Mint is a free download. Xandros has a free “community version” and the fully-supported commercial version.
For more technically-inclined users, these are still good desktops, but will require some tweaks in order to satisfy. For such users, I would recommend Kubuntu or Ubuntu; Fedora (especially if you like to fiddle and customize things); or PC-BSD.
In each of these desktops, the system is designed in ways that minimize the damage that viruses, worms, and other malware can do. No system can prevent a user from giving bad software as much access as he or she has, but these desktops generally limit the damage in ways that Windows was not designed to do. Despite the advertising of the major anti-virus vendors, it not generally necessary to install anti-virus in GNU+Linux-based or BSD-based operating systems, although I generally do install ClamAV or similar products. I would certainly use Linux-native protection instead of the corporate Symantec subscription on Linux or BSD systems.
If you are considering upgrading or replacing your Microsoft Windows 2000 or Microsoft Windows XP desktops, I would encourage you to consider Linux Mint and Xandros for your non-technical users and those two plus Ubuntu/Kubuntu, Fedora, or PC-BSD for your technical users.
Permalink
04.07.07
Posted in FLOSS, Political, Small Business at 22:58 by lnxwalt
California and AB-1668: Why Do We Need It?
I have discussed the general politics of why California needs quick passage of AB-1668. It simply makes good social, political, and economic policy.
I want to speak to the impact on smaller businesses, and why I believe that small businesses in California stand to gain in the long run if AB-1668 is passed quickly, in its current form.
Follow The Money Trail
One thing that is always necessary when someone comes squawking for political action is to find out who benefits from it. A few years ago, there was a bill to mandate employer-paid health insurance in California. Suddenly, we saw commercials featuring tearful small business owners (such as restauranteurs) asking why they were being forced out of business. The problem was, those commercials were also helpful to certain large, wealthy, out-of-state companies. Which group do you think (small businesses or large ones) had the resources to fund a statewide political campaign? Why do you think they did it?
If you said they wanted to keep all the money for themselves, you get an “A” for the day.
Now when you hear someone asking for “choice” in file formats instead of open standards that can be used by anyone in the industry, (that is, someone who opposes bills like AB-1668), whose financial interests are at stake? Do their interests and the interests of the state and its citizens agree on it? Probably not, since they would not need to mount this opposition campaign if their own interests were not opposed to the interests of the general public.
Mandatory Shift Coming
Microsoft, rather than open up the specification for their legacy binary formats (e.g., .doc, .xls. .ppt), chose to move to a completely different set of formats for Office 2007 and beyond. It gave them the opportunity to clean out a bunch of cruft that had built up over the years. But they did not choose to do so. Instead, they brought all of that foulness into their file formats for the foreseeable future.
We already know that the current binary file formats that are commonly used in business are being killed off. There are two primary choices as to where your business may go in the future. The first, OASIS OpenDocument Format (ISO/IEC 26300:2006), is open–controlled by a standards organization which makes updates to it from time to time and is not beholden to a particular vendor–and has been selected by regional and national governments and their agencies all around the world. It is used by multiple vendors of office application suites, content management systems, and format transformation tools. It is used by online office sites like Google Docs and Zoho Office. It is an official international standard, approved by the ISO.
The other choice is Microsoft-Ecma Office Open XML, known as ECMA 376 or ISO/IEC DIS 29500. The DIS part indicates that it is being discussed for possible acceptance as a standard. There is only one product that supports it, Microsoft Office 2007. When Ecma International received their charter to standardize the format, they were given a predesigned format and told to rubber-stamp it. In the current ISO discussion, 19 nations lodged objections to the format or the fast-track process being used to push it through the standards group.
… to produce a formal standard for office productivity applications within the Ecma International standards process which is fully compatible with the Office Open XML Formats….
How Does This Affect You?
But let us discuss why this is important to your business. You have older documents from 1994, don’t you? Good. See if you can open it today. There is a good chance that you can not. Why? Well, you saved them on 5 1/4 inch floppy disks, and now you do not have any equipment that can read them. Or maybe you were dilligent about moving your data to newer storage. But you were probably using WordPerfect 5.1 on MS-DOS back then. Today’s Word may not be capable of reading that format. Or maybe your data was saved in the then-current version of Word. That does not necessarily mean that you can read it with your current version.
Maybe that file includes your rich uncle’s will, you know, the one where he left everything to you? If you can not find a way to open that file, everything goes to your cousin Fred. So you hire the neighborhood teen whiz kid, but he has recently been visited by the copyright enforcers. He refuses to get your data into a format you can use today unless you get a signed letter from the CEO of the company that made the software that you used to create that file. (Blasted DMCA! You stand to lose millions and you can not even break into your own files to get your own data!)
This will be repeated with today’s data unless you select a format that is open, and which has explicit permission for anyone to use it for any application for any reason at any time.
I am not a legal beagle, but those who are have not been convinced that MS-OOXML is a safe bet for implementers.
You already know what happens when one of your suppliers gets a monopoly share in the market. After a while, prices rise and quality falls. The supplier stops improving the product and it becomes a “cash cow” for them. Perhaps they use the cash for executive bonuses. Maybe they use it to subsidize money-losing ventures that would otherwise close.
This has already happened with office application suite software, but we now have a chance to reverse it. Our monopoly supplier is making major, incompatible changes in their office software, including new file formats. Regardless of what else you do, you will pay big bucks. So now, you can move all at once to a new format that is not controlled by any single vendor. Suddenly, anyone’s products can read and write your documents in an accurate way. You no longer need one particular vendor’s products–if they refuse to give you the pricing and features that you want, you can find someone else who can–because the applications’ native file format becomes irrelevant to the decision.
But there is more reason for you to make your stand for ODF. One of the richest companies in the world has your state and your company in its grasp. The vendor has every reason to fight a proposal that would reduce your costs and the costs to taxpayers. On the other hand, you business and your state have every reason to support this proposal. Why? Because an industry-wide standard means that you can use almost any vendor’s product and still get the same result. It puts control in your hands instead of the vendor’s hands.
Certainly, you could choose to sit idly on the sidelines while others decide your future. However, our audience, or at least our target audience, has a high percentage of both business owners and technical people who are able to recognize the potential benefit to us all and who recognize that Microsoft is threatened by this because it would reduce the profitability of one of their cash cows.
Smaller businesses benefit from open standards.
In the course of everyday business, users of open standards have the ability to mix and match products from different vendors to achieve their desired result. This means that your business does not become dependent upon any particular vendor’s products, but instead maintains the ability to swap a product with other vendors’s products at any time.
This is the reason why the World Wide Web works so well. You used to have to use special AOL software for their network, special Compuserve software for their network, special MSN software for their network, and special Prodigy software for their network. If you were an active member of all of them, you had to have several different programs installed in order to do the same things. When commercial use of the Web exploded ten or twelve years ago, suddenly, these “walled gardens” could not keep up and began to lose their allure. The freedom to use any network with the any set of software made it very attractive to build Web sites versus Compuserve-only sites. To be sure, many sites had both a Web component and a part that was only inside of one of those walled garden networks. But the freedom in the Internet enabled all sorts of things (both good and bad) that had never been considered before.
Your business, by selecting an open, XML-based file format (and I do not mean Microsoft’s not-so-open-xml format), makes it possible to create all sorts of unexpected uses for the data that had previously been locked up in your documents.
Permalink
03.29.07
Posted in FLOSS, News and Announcements at 20:37 by lnxwalt
As Reverend Ted points out, the market for desktop operating systems contains more than just Microsoft Windows and Apple Mac OS X. The question is how to make this apparent to the world around us.
Microsoft, of course, has staked out a position as the stuffy businessperson. Apple has staked out a position as the cool media-oriented fun guy. The three YouTube videos on Ted’s post are a takeoff on Apple’s tremendously popular “I’m a PC, I’m a Mac” series of commercials, with an added twist: Linux joins the discussion.
Take a look.
technorati tags:Linux, I’m+a+Mac
Blogged with Flock
Permalink
03.13.07
Posted in FLOSS, Small Business at 22:01 by lnxwalt
Erwin Tanenbaum reports that another German city is moving to the OpenOffice.org suite. He reports that the switch to OOo will save around a half-million Euros over a two-year period as compared to migrating to Microsoft Office 2007.
Given the fact that smaller businesses have fewer resources to begin with, those of us who work for their benefit need to move them away from expensive proprietary software, which is often laced with TUR and other anti-user features, and onto user-friendly FLOSS. It is not just the financial investment (licensing cost), but also the upgrade schedules and feature sets. How many times have you come to depend upon a certain feature working a certain way, but then comes an upgrade that does things in a completely different way without any good reason? That meant that the vendor needed another infusion of cash, so they shuffled a few things around and called it a new version of the software.
At WebConnect Consulting, we promise that we will always prefer and advocate the FLOSS solution over a comparable proprietary solution. We believe this is the best thing we can do for the smaller and often-times younger businesses that we are here to help build up. This does not mean that we will not use or select or install or support proprietary software–when it makes sense to do so–however, we believe that FLOSS is the future of software.
When you read about a leading proprietary operating system’s anti-theft technologies making it dangerously unstable and subject to attacks by crackers, ask yourself whether Microsoft is helping you or the recording industry. We believe that once you understand that certain large corporations want to forcibly extract money from you regardless of whether you believe their products are worth their prices, you will join us in buying, using, and advocating FLOSS.
Permalink
