[Sussex] Open Source and the Government.

[Mark Harrison]

Geoff,

As ever, a well-argued post. Thank you for taking the time.

Let the record show that I went to a progressive University, where MINIX
_was_ the Operating System taught, in the late 80s/early 90s.

Regards,

Mark

-----Original Message-----
From: Geoff Teale [mailto:Geoff.Teale at claybrook.co.uk] 
Sent: 21 January 2003 13:14
To: 'sussex at mailman.lug.org.uk'
Subject: RE: [Sussex] Open Source and the Government.


Mark H wrote:
-------------
> It's clear that there's little understanding of the concept of the GPL

> in government / public sector circles.

Actually there are several people in the public sector who do understand
these things - even in companies likes the dreaded EDS there are people
who understand these things - trouble is they're all geeks and as such
they get written off as being geeks (to business people and civil
servant alike "geek" is a put-down).  This was my experience at Thomson
as well.  The point is, if you want to ask a question about law you goto
a lawyer or a law professor - you don't go and ask a company with a
vested interest in twisting the law to there benefit.  Unfortunately the
IT industry has grown up such that the majority of people look to the
visions of the heads of major corporations.  Both the current government
and my former employer (actually my former manager really, the company
as a whole might have taken a different approach) look at it like this:

Geek:	"Did you know we could save masses of money and deliver more
robust
solutions using Open Source software?"

Manager/Beaurocrat:  "Oooh, that sounds nice.  Oh, but hang on, a
moment, this article in my trade  magazine (Getting to grips out of
Windows XP) says that it's not a good idea.  Ha ha, I leave that to you
geeks thanks very much".
 
> I wonder how much of this stems from the use of the word "free". The 
> term "Free software" does NOT give over the impression of quality and 
> supportability, however true the reality might be.
>
> I wonder if third-party consultants started using the term
> "Open Source"
> software, and including references to companies like IBM who use it,
> then it might not be an easier sell than "free"?

The majority of companies vending such software do use the phrase "open
source", the arguement you are making is the same one used to justify
the new name in the first place.  How much difference this has made to
sales / take up is hard to quantify.  I imagine there are some people
who can't get past the "Free" thing - it's interesting that SCO, ne
Caldera, found that companies are happier to use their Linux product if
they charge a per-seat fee than if they just charge for media and
support - how random is that. 

Funnily enough some markets (education and scientific research) are
filled with people who hold the concept of Freedom in the GPL sense very
highly as the foundation of what they do - these markets can (And are)
being sold the idea of Free Software very succesfully.  According to the
folks at MIT, students in the USA are now choosing between universities
to study computer science at on the basis that they'll learn a lot more
at a University that uses and produces Free software.

Anyone who studied OS design in the 1980's or early 1990's probably owes
any understanding of the operation of a modern operating system they
gained to the efforts of one man - Andrew S Tannenbaum, unfortunately
MINIX was viewed as widely irrelevant to most universities by the early
1990's as they clammoured to give students practicle experience of DOS
and Windows - LINUX has now turned the tide - by providing an
environment where students can learn how an OS really works but cen also
be justifed as a real-world, commericially focused tool.

-- 
geoff.teale at claybrook.co.uk
tealeg at member.fsf.org

"and the mighty multinationals
have monopolized the oxygen
so it's as easy as breathing
for us all to participate"
- Ani DiFranco "Your next bold move"




The above information is confidential to the addressee and may be
privileged.  Unauthorised access and use is prohibited.
 
Internet communications are not secure and therefore this Company does
not accept legal responsibility for the contents of this message.
 
If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying,
distribution or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on
it, is prohibited and may be unlawful.
 
Claybrook Computing Limited is a subsidiary of Claybrook Computing
(Holdings) Limited Registered Office: Abbey House. 282 Farnborough Road,
Farnborough, Hampshire GU14 7NJ Registered in England and Wales No
1287205
 
A Hogg Robinson plc company


_______________________________________________
Sussex mailing list
Sussex at mailman.lug.org.uk
http://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/sussex

________________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan
service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working
around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com
________________________________________________________________________