[NTLUG:Discuss] Open Source

[Leroy Tennison]

Daniel Hauck wrote:
> Greg Edwards wrote:
>>> From: discuss-bounces at ntlug.org [mailto:discuss-bounces at ntlug.org] On
>>> Behalf Of Kenneth Loafman
>>>> Seriously, I hope everyone on this list takes Linux more serious
>> than
>>>> this.  Otherwise, I don't see it advancing much more than it has.
>>> Many years ago I committed to replace 100 Windows systems with Linux
>>> systems, both at work and for friends.  Its been a battle in some
>> cases
>>> and a real pleasure in others, but I made it and kept on going.  If we
>>> all did the same thing, we could make progress.
>>>
>>> Word-of-mouth advertising is the most potent form of advertising.
>>>
>>> ...Ken
>>>
>> One of the aspect of the Boy Scouts open source project that has me
>> excited is the opportunity to spread the word about OSS.  We'll be
>> building a section of the site called "About Open Source" that will be
>> dedicated to educating the world about open source.  The About Open
>> Source section will be a Wiki and the open source community (NTLUG
>> included) will be invited to build the content.
>>
>> --
>> Greg Edwards
> 
> Open Source Religion
> 
> The movement of open source is important because it's a return to where 
> we have been in the beginnings of the IT industry.  Software was the 
> stuff that made the computer useful... it was the computer that we paid 
> for.  The business of selling software as a product is a bad idea and 
> everything that has followed since then to support that business model 
> has become disastrous.  And movements in the direction of "software as a 
> service" is even more dangerous as important data and information has 
> even greater potential of being locked away from users and/or accessed 
> by other parties.  Open Source restores power and control to those who 
> need it most.
> 
> But evangelizing F/OSS is a pretty big turn-off for most people and I 
> believe it does more harm than good.  If your first exposure to F/OSS 
> came in the form of some crazed enthusiast, or some religious sounding 
> zealot, the significance of F/OSS would be over-powered by other 
> impressions left on the people being presented to.  (This is largely why 
> I have loved the Linux ads sponsored by IBM... IBM is nothing resembling 
> a crazed enthusiast nor a religious zealot.  And if people first hear 
> about Linux from the likes of IBM, people are more inclined to associate 
> Linux and F/OSS with established and powerful business.)
> 
> 'Spreading the Word' is an idea that is worrisome to me for some reason 
> and I think it's because it reminds me of religion.  We're talking about 
> information technology, software and data formats that can be trusted 
> and breaking vendor lock-in.  And I'm sorry to put it this way, but when 
> F/OSS is presented as if it were a religion, people start to question 
> how much of your knowledge is factual and how much is 'faith' because 
> whether or not we acknowledge it directly, people associate some things 
> with other things such as "faith" and "religion" are words closely 
> related just as "faith" and "facts" are related as opposites.
> 
> I like Chris Cox because he's all about presenting the facts, about what 
> works and about what is functional and practical.  I dislike Chris Cox 
> because he's right too often and he knows too damned much.  But one 
> thing he never seems to come across as being, is 'religious.'
> 
> I'd be a horrible spokesperson for Linux as I lean in the direction of 
> the 'crazed enthusiast' and it doesn't help that I'm something of a 
> well-known Microsoft hater.  Any presentation or information about Linux 
> or F/OSS that I demonstrate is inherently colored by my other 
> attributes.  The same is true for anyone else with a tint in their 
> public face.  I'm tinted and I know it all too well and if I were to 
> push Linux the way some people would like, I would invariably do a 
> disservice to the community by associating myself with the movement.
> 
> So I have to wonder and ask if anyone else is pushing their position in 
> a way that colors Linux and F/OSS in ways unintended or in ways that 
> might even put people off.
> 
> People always have and always will associate the message with the 
> messenger.  If someone has bad teeth or bad breath when discussing the 
> virtues of Linux with someone, what impression of Linux will the other 
> party come away with?  Seriously.  You can't fix human nature; you can 
> only work with it.
> 
> You probably already know if you're a good messenger or not.  I'm not! 
> So I only put it where it works well and am generally quiet about it 
> unless someone asks.  Leadership by example is humble and never wins any 
> awards or recognition, but it's the best contribution I can make without 
> causing much harm.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> http://www.ntlug.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> 
Actually, whether it is religious (in the original, plain meaning of the 
term) or not, there is a way to promote it and a way not to promote it. 
  Zealotry seems to fall in the 'way not to ..' category and the object 
of the zealotry doesn't matter: religion (Christianity, Islam, etc.), 
business (Amway, Avon, whatever), an idea (Democrat, Republican, Open 
Source, fill-in-the-blank) or anything else for that matter.