Comments on: Open Source: The un-eaten free-lunch http://www.katescomment.com/open-source-the-un-eaten-free-lunch/ Thoughts on British ICT, energy & environment, "Cloud", and security from Memset's MD Sat, 28 Jan 2012 11:21:13 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Katehttp://www.katescomment.com/open-source-the-un-eaten-free-lunch/comment-page-1/#comment-12 Kate Mon, 25 Sep 2006 14:37:46 +0000 http://www.katescomment.com/wordpress/?p=17#comment-12 Oops! As you say; food on the brain. I will change that - thank you. As for the stylesheet, I am using a modified version of one of the LiveJournal layers. Some elements are deliberately disabled, although not the comments form so I shall have a look at that (needs more tweaking probably!). Oops! As you say; food on the brain. I will change that – thank you.

As for the stylesheet, I am using a modified version of one of the LiveJournal layers. Some elements are deliberately disabled, although not the comments form so I shall have a look at that (needs more tweaking probably!).

]]> By: anonymoushttp://www.katescomment.com/open-source-the-un-eaten-free-lunch/comment-page-1/#comment-11 anonymous Tue, 19 Sep 2006 15:09:54 +0000 http://www.katescomment.com/wordpress/?p=17#comment-11 You were definately hungry when you wrote this... "Munch city council" ? ;) P.S have you got a custom stylesheet for this blog? It's rendering labels invisible and this form appears to be 'disabled'. You were definately hungry when you wrote this…

“Munch city council” ? ;)

P.S have you got a custom stylesheet for this blog? It’s rendering labels invisible and this form appears to be ‘disabled’.

]]> By: uberseehandelhttp://www.katescomment.com/open-source-the-un-eaten-free-lunch/comment-page-1/#comment-10 uberseehandel Wed, 13 Sep 2006 16:24:58 +0000 http://www.katescomment.com/wordpress/?p=17#comment-10 I am using a 'nice' bit of open source software - Gizmo Project - as my preferred VoIP softphone - it just works. Added benefits include an effective interface to the PSTN, the ability to work with Asterisk and SIP PBXs and effective end to end encryption - whats not to like? One of the bonuses is that voice mail ends up in my email box Full marks to the open soiurce believers behind this software I am using a ‘nice’ bit of open source software – Gizmo Project – as my preferred VoIP softphone – it just works. Added benefits include an effective interface to the PSTN, the ability to work with Asterisk and SIP PBXs and effective end to end encryption – whats not to like?
One of the bonuses is that voice mail ends up in my email box

Full marks to the open soiurce believers behind this software

]]> By: Katehttp://www.katescomment.com/open-source-the-un-eaten-free-lunch/comment-page-1/#comment-9 Kate Tue, 12 Sep 2006 12:47:59 +0000 http://www.katescomment.com/wordpress/?p=17#comment-9 Fair point; Opera is indeed not open source (Firefox would have been a better and more popular example - I just like Opera, but shall edit the above), but as you say it is the cost factor that is the main benefit to most users. You are also right that in many cases OSS is playing "catch up", but over the few years many of the leading OSS applications have truly become viable alternatives to proprietary software - especially when considering server applications such as Apache. It should probably also be noted that many main-stream open source projects such as vTiger CRM (Customer Relationship Management) are commercialised to an extent. vTiger is fairly typical example in that the software is open source free but you can purcahse support for it. Fair point; Opera is indeed not open source (Firefox would have been a better and more popular example – I just like Opera, but shall edit the above), but as you say it is the cost factor that is the main benefit to most users. You are also right that in many cases OSS is playing “catch up”, but over the few years many of the leading OSS applications have truly become viable alternatives to proprietary software – especially when considering server applications such as Apache.

It should probably also be noted that many main-stream open source projects such as vTiger CRM (Customer Relationship Management) are commercialised to an extent. vTiger is fairly typical example in that the software is open source free but you can purcahse support for it.

]]> By: pjamesharveyhttp://www.katescomment.com/open-source-the-un-eaten-free-lunch/comment-page-1/#comment-8 pjamesharvey Tue, 12 Sep 2006 11:27:54 +0000 http://www.katescomment.com/wordpress/?p=17#comment-8 The Opera web browser isn't open source software (OSS), even if it is free (as in beer). It's perhaps important to note the difference between free-as-in-beer and free-as-in-speech. The Free Software Foundation defines what it means by 'free' software, as does the GNU project: http://www.fsf.org/licensing/essays/free-software-for-freedom.html http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html For most users, I would suggest that the choice of cost-free OSS over the proprietary software comes down to money: there is no direct monetary cost involved in downloading and using the software. I doubt more than a handful care that the source code is included or even look at it, let alone tinker with the workings. It may be that the OSS replacements are functionally better than the proprietary offerings, but more often it is the OSS that is trying to catch up with the features of the proprietary software (web browsers, like Firefox, being the exception). This is normally because the nature of closed-source software makes it difficult to reverse-engineer the features and make the OSS functionally equivalent to the point that it can be used as a replacement. OSS advocates push to adopt standards so that inter-operability is easy to implement, so that the choice of which sofware to use comes down to ease-of-use and functionality rather than being locked-in to a brand you have no control over. The real power of OSS lies in the hands of developers. They bring the benefits of free-as-in-beer software with competitive functionality to the user. The Opera web browser isn’t open source software (OSS), even if it is free (as in beer). It’s perhaps important to note the difference between free-as-in-beer and free-as-in-speech. The Free Software Foundation defines what it means by ‘free’ software, as does the GNU project:

http://www.fsf.org/licensing/essays/free-software-for-freedom.html
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html

For most users, I would suggest that the choice of cost-free OSS over the proprietary software comes down to money: there is no direct monetary cost involved in downloading and using the software. I doubt more than a handful care that the source code is included or even look at it, let alone tinker with the workings.

It may be that the OSS replacements are functionally better than the proprietary offerings, but more often it is the OSS that is trying to catch up with the features of the proprietary software (web browsers, like Firefox, being the exception). This is normally because the nature of closed-source software makes it difficult to reverse-engineer the features and make the OSS functionally equivalent to the point that it can be used as a replacement. OSS advocates push to adopt standards so that inter-operability is easy to implement, so that the choice of which sofware to use comes down to ease-of-use and functionality rather than being locked-in to a brand you have no control over.

The real power of OSS lies in the hands of developers. They bring the benefits of free-as-in-beer software with competitive functionality to the user.

]]>