fsuk-manchester
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Fsuk-manchester] the non-free neighbour asking for help dilemma


From: Tim Dobson
Subject: Re: [Fsuk-manchester] the non-free neighbour asking for help dilemma
Date: Fri, 16 May 2008 14:40:20 +0100
User-agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (X11/20080505)

Matthew Larsen wrote:
Hi All,

Hey Matthew :)

I have been following this discussion with much interest and would
like to make the following points. FYI I am fully supportive of FOS
Software & Standards, but the following I think are equally valid
points for the use of proprietry software.

1) Accountability. If an entity creates a piece of software for a
specific purpose, then sells / licenses that software to a 3rd party
and that 3rd party reports an error or malfunction in that software,
the originating entity is accountable to maintain that software or
provide adequate compensation. This is not guaranteed with free
software. Accountability can be a very important issue and should not
be ignored.

Sure. In fact I'm sure many people here would totally agree. However, with Free Software, things *will* change a bit in how they work.

Firstly, assume this is a relatively large project, in small projects as in small businesses, the dynamics are different, and levels of support responses can be awesome like Blue Fountain Systems[1] and define you as a company or can be totally crap (I won't name them!).

In larger commercial organisations, the level of support tends to be roughly the same and likewise in larger free software projects.

However, what many company's do, and this is where lots of company's make money out of free software, is that they offer support for their project.

In many cases this is better support than you could expect from say, Microsoft or Adobe etc.

In a Microsoft/Adobe/$nonfree_software_comapny they are likely to say:
"thank you for reporting the bug"
you say: "and?"
they say: "our engineers are working on the issue and it should be resolved soon"
you: "and? - it's still broken now"
they say: "in six months time we are releasing a new, even better version with x,y,z you will have to pay us to upgrade to that to see if we have fixed your issue or not"

Support from non-free software companies is not always so great - they have a monopoly over the support - you can't pay someone else to fix their software in a timely manner, which you could do with free software. Whilst they are accountable for the problems in their software, for many, defending the reputation, or creating a good reputation, isn't at the forefront of their minds, when their customer uncovers a problem in their software.

2) Secrets. Government or Military would not want to release or use
software which will potentially aid the enemy.

Considering the US government, specifically the NSA[2], started development of SELinux[3] (Security Enhanced Linux) and subsequently released it under a free software licence

In addition the Trusted BSD[4] project is sponsored by DARPA[], the US military research agency.

It is highly likely that the UK is utilising the code of these projects for our own security projects. Being able to analyse the code means that we know the Americans haven't put remote login features etc. in.

However, it's also possible that North Korea, Iran, Burma, $bad_country_of_the_month are using these systems. Indeed because these security subsystems are even in things like Ubuntu[6], it's conceivably possible for me to run systems as secure as the NSA.

Free Software use within Government security agencies is even more widespread than you might think - a few years ago it was revealed that the NSA uses security software such as Nmap[7] and other free software licenced security tools.

3) Staff (this is the one I expect a lot of flak for). Good IT
Proffesionals work hard and produce great code / systems / support etc
and should be compensated respectively. IT is a business, it is there
to make money to hire better staff to make more money etc etc etc. I
have worked on projects where we go FOSS. Sometimes the community is
fantastic, othertimes not (we would donate to the original developers
to create an interface on their system for us, but because of their
lack of commercial experience it tends to fall apart). It all depends.

See the point above. No one expects to work for nothing, but no-one has suggested that, indeed the "free" in Free software, as you know relates to "freedom" and not price in general etc.

Issues surrounding money are a totally different issue.

But take the issue mentioned before - you are using a free software program, it breaks, the development community won't fix it gratis to fit your development schedule (they have jobs too!) so you hire a company like Blue Fountain Systems or M6:IT[8] or something to fix your problem and release their code to the retrospective communities.

The problem is fixed pronto, the professionals get money, the users get their working system. Even the developers are happy because it means they have less work/stress dealing with people who want them to react like a paid developer gratis, which at best, is an uncomfortable position to be in.

4) There is a very strong 'them and us' attitude when it comes to OSS
and software houses. The company I work for will not decide to use
either one or the other, but a combination of the both: ergo 'Use the
right tools for the right job'. Sometimes the pressure to use
Proprietry or FOSS is from external pressure (A good example of this
is RNLI: Microsoft offered to provide all their software for free and
put a tender out for a company to implement it. Yes they could have
gone FOSS / Linux; but that would cost a fortune to retrain all their
staff and support technicians / interfaces to their radios or whatever
else. If you're getting it for free why change?)

Richard Stallman would argue that, in this case, the RNLI, should use free software because it is the right thing to do, it also gives them more freedom from vendor tie in etc.

I think you would really benefit from watching the talk Richard Stallamn did when he was in Manchester, the video is available online here[9] and VLC should play it nicely. Let me know if you have any problems.

At the other end you have me, a part-time volunteer for a small sailing club, making the decision that that proprietary software is not the best solution and is wrong, and so as long as I am dealing with their IT systems, they will pretty much only use free software. However when I go, they won't be using a system that only Microsoft can fix, but in theory that they could employ someone (relatively skilled) to fix.

I hope this helps! *Runs and hides from incoming fire*

You don't get flamed on the Manchester Free Software list!
/me puts out some embers on a different bit of it... ;)

In all seriousness, while you will undoubtedly encounter differing opinions, I hope people explain them in a friendly, understanding way.

Cheers

Tim :)

-----

[1] http://www.bluefountain.com
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Agency
[3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security-Enhanced_Linux
[4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FreeBSD#TrustedBSD
[5] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DARPA
[6] http://www.ubuntu.com
[7] http://nmap.org/nmap_inthenews.html
[8] http://www.m6-it.org
[9] http://manchester.fsuk.org/blog/2008/05/06/free-software-in-ethics-and-society-richard-stallman-manchester-1st-may



--
www.tdobson.net
----
If each of us have one object, and we exchange them, then each of us
still has one object.
If each of us have one idea, and we exchange them, then each of us now
has two ideas.   -  George Bernard Shaw




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]