[Fsfe-uk] Re: [discuss] Re: Re: [discuss] Open source software News

[ian]

On Sat, 2004-03-13 at 13:25, Chris Sherlock wrote:
> ian wrote:
> > On Fri, 2004-03-12 at 12:38, Chris Sherlock wrote:
> > 
> >>I suppose this seems like a fair enough answer... I guess you see 
> >>software more as an infrastructure that the govt should maintain and 
> >>develop. I'm still not so sure...
> > 
> > 
> > Not really, I see the government as a large customer for software acting
> > on behalf of me, the taxpayer and if I wanted a piece of software to go
> > on 100,000 desktops and I knew I could commission its development for
> > say £1m, I certainly wouldn't use someone else's code licensed at £100 a
> > machine. Its simple economics. 1 < 10 and once the code is GPL'd other
> > people will use it and probably lower my costs in other software
> > acquisition.
> > 
> > I have no problem with paying for licenses for a specialist product
> > where it cost say £10k in licenses but the development cost would be
> > millions.
> 
> That's actually a pretty interesting point. I didn't think of it like that.
> 
> >>What I *do* think, however, is that governments should make it 
> >>compulsory for software companies (and peripheral companies, in 
> >>particular!) to open their code.
> > 
> > 
> > That would require legislation though I'm not against it. My solution is
> > simply using existing criteria for best value. In fact it could be
> > argued that the Government is acting illegally in not doing so.
> 
> Ah, but now I'm not just talking about the benefit to the goverment. I'm 
> now talking about the benefit of open code to ALL consumers. The point 
> shifted slightly but importantly :P

Benefit to the Government *is* benefit to all consumers in that the
consumers elected that Government to act on their behalf. While I agree
that this is not a perfect match, the democratic process is the best of
a bad set of options.

> People should be able to get access to source-code to fix things that 
> don't work, should they so wish. For instance they shouldn't have to 
> wait for 6 months for some security flaw to be fixed!

Fine if government sponsor development they should then be GPL. OTOH if
there is really no alternative but to used closed source for a
particular application the Gov needs to keep that option open. If they
insist on open standards and fund projects eg OO.o where it is obviously
in their (our) economic interest to do so I think the instances of
having to used closed source will dwindle. Let's eat the elephant a bite
at a time. Let's go for strategy/policy that is attainable and then
incrementally build from this position.

> If my car breaks down, I can get it fixed. If my closed-source software 
> has a bug in it, can I get it fixed even if I pay for it? Not unless the 
> creators can be bothered to. I suppose the argument could be to take it 
> back to the place of purchase for a refund - well here's why this won't 
> work:
> 
> 1. Ever tried this? the standard response is that it must be a system 
> failure (trust me, I work for a fairly large company and I hear people 
> say this to customer's all the time) or that they don't offer refunds on 
> software because it's already used.
> 
> 2. Why should I? Why can't I just get the damned thing repaired? I might 
> actually like the product but not the support I'm getting 'cause the 
> company who made the software is sticking their head in the sand and 
> denying that anything is at fault (or they can't reproduce the problem - 
> how many times has *that* happened I wonder).

Its not a perfect world. The question is how can it be improved not so
much how can I achieve perfection tomorrow. We need to take on and fight
battles we can win to progressively move towards utopia rather than
trying to get their in on leap only to fall into a hole.

> >> Do you know the number of times I've 
> >>had to scrap or make do with 2nd-best because I couldn't see the source 
> >>code of some crappy product???? :) I guess that's why I only run Linux 
> >>now (especially now I've worked out CUPS and Samba).
> > 
> > 
> > You are doing better than me then :-)
> 
> You aren't using Linux exclusively or your having problems setting up 
> CUPS and Samba? :P If the latter give me an email and I'll see if I can 
> help, if the former - get a move on and upgrade! :)

No, I use Linux most of the time but I don't personally get involved
with CUPS and Samba, other people in the company do that stuff for me
:-)

-- 
ian <address@hidden>