[NTLUG:Discuss] Open Source

[Greg Edwards]

> Chris Cox wrote:
> 

> 
> As some of you may have guessed, the "guy" was Eric Raymond.
> 
> My own personal experience is that the ground-up approach
> works much, much better. Hopefully Eric won't shoot me for
> saying so. :)
> 
> I do agree that there are certain niche's where Linux is
> an excellent fit across the board.. including the desktop.
> So... there isn't a "one size fits all" statement that anyone
> can make.... thus I can only say "in general".  I do wish
> I had some stats about the companies that tried to go
> 100% and then went back though.
> 

I'll go back to my root belief that education is the key to the whole
thing.  There is a widely held perception that if it's cheap then you
get what you pay for.  The 2nd misconception is that if it isn't sold by
a major corporation then it must not be a superior product.  If you look
back to the "shareware" phase of our profession's history those
statements were well earned.

IMO, the revolution that Eric started hasn't resulted in a world where
software is free, it's resulted in a world where we are free to do what
we love to do.  This may not have been Eric's vision, but I think it has
been the true result.  What Linus did would not have been possible
without Eric, at the same time the explosion in influence that Eric has
gained would not have been possible without Linus.  Both of them would
be unknown if wasn't for people like us who were able to do what we love
to do.  They provided a venue for people that wanted to build something
better, and they contributed in a big way.

Why do we fight so hard for Linux?  Why are we so passionate about
Linux?  Is it because it's free?  Is it because it isn't being sold by
Microsoft?  I think it's because we're engineers and Linux is plainly a
better solution than the other options.  If you were a mechanic would
you rather work on a Pinto or a Corvette?  If you were a pilot would you
rather fly a Cesna or an F-16?  If Windows was free or Open Source would
anyone here want to work on it, or Linux?

I am willing to admit that I was a major skeptic of Open Source.  I've
used GCC and other FSF tools for longer than I'd care to admit.  In the
early days I didn't view them as free since you had to pay for the
manuals, and they were expensive.  When Linux first started gaining
traction I was happy to be able to have a *NIX that I could afford to
put on my own computer (Xenix and SCO were expensive jokes).  But I was
not convinced about Open Source until StarOffice proved to me that I
didn't need a shrink wrapped box to get a useful application.  I haven't
looked back since.

Back to the education issue.  The best way to promote Linux (IMHO) is to
prove to users that they can get serious applications where the price
and the copyright name is not a pre-qualifier associated with quality
and support.  And the best way to break the myth of price and name
recognition is to help users understand how Open Source works.  Teach
them about who is behind it, how it's built, how to get it, how to get
support, and insure them that what they use will be there in the future.
We need to help users understand that they can influence the future of
their favorite apps through their voices and their wallets instead of
just paying for whatever the corporation decides they'll get.  If users
get comfortable with the idea of not having to pay big corporations for
apps, then they'll get comfortable with the idea of not having to pay
big corporation for the OS that the apps run on.

This is why I'm so excited about the project that I'm working on.  This
is not a company trying to take advantage of Open Source, this is an
organization trying to promote Open Source.  And they are committed to
funding the effort.  I'm hoping that if this works other companies and
organizations will follow our lead.

--
Greg Edwards