Re: Article for comment

The analogy with the cookies was great. However, IMHO, you should've
explained the difference of free and open source software more clearly;
or you should have pointed people to a link that gives their difference.
Otherwise, saying that "open source is synonymous with free software" in
the _first_ sentence of the _first_ paragraph is useless if not
misleading. Reading your first sentence, i thought you were gonna talk
about why free software advocates should also care about open source
software. Or that you would go right along declaring that Open Source is
better than Free Software as opposed to what a page on the GNU website
claims[1]. Of course, it might just be my feeble mind that lead me to
thinking this.

I suppose that you want to start your article by defining what Open
Source means. If so, you might want to start right out with its
difference from commercial softwares. This gives a broader perspective
to the whole thing. Afterwards, you could prolly narrow it down to
defining open source. Tho, your definition (the numbered list), i think,
suits Free _and_ Open Source Software licenses. Maybe it's a good idea
to change the title to "Why You Should Care About Free and Open Source?"

Also, please check if it's true that there are Free Software that are
not Open Source. I googled and scanned an article[2] on Wikipedia that
says, "All free software is open source; free software is a subset of
open source software." Tho, i think that page has only been edited 20
times. If you could specify a case -- or give a source that specifies a
case -- where free software isn't open source, please send it and i'll
edit that Wikipedia page accordingly, or if you can, please edit it
yourself.

What publication are gonna put this up on, BTW? Is it ok to copy this to
a webpage/weblog?

I hope my comments are helpful. Also, thanks for giving me another way
of explaining FOSS to other people.

eman


[1] "Free Software" is better than "Open Source"
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.html

[2] Open source vs. free software
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_source_vs._free_software


On Mon, 2005-11-28 at 21:10 +0800, Dominique Cimafranca wrote:
> Hi, all,
> 
> Wrote this up for a publication.  Thought it might be useful to some
> folks, so I'm posting it here.  Please do send in your comments.
> Thanks.
> 
> --Dom
> 
> 
> 
> Why You Should Care About Open Source
> 
> To many people, open source is synonymous with free software.  Therein
> lies the trouble.  While the two sometimes coincide, it is not always
> the case.  Sometimes, you have free software that is not open source;
> and sometimes, you have open source software that is not free.
> 
> Confused?  Let's try to clear things up, starting with the word
> "free."  There are two meanings to "free" when referring to software.
> The first, and probably the more common, refers to zero-cost.
> Appropriately, this is the term that applies to freeware, whatever
> platform they may run on.  The second meaning is less common and
> relates to freedom.  
> 
> Ah, but freedom to do what? And why do we need this in the first
> place?
> 
> Most software today is governed by licenses that permit the user to do
> certain things while restricting others.  So, for example, a Microsoft
> Windows license will legally let you run the operating system on only
> one computer, and not on another.  It does not allow you to give it
> away to another person nor to take it apart and study what makes it
> work from the inside.
> 
> In contrast, an open source license, as defined by the Open Source
> Consortium, will allow you four fundamental freedoms: (1) the freedom
> to run the program for any purpose; (2) the freedom to study the
> program; (3) the freedom to improve the program; and (4) the freedom
> to distribute the program. The human-readable source code is
> fundamental to the last three freedoms, and therefore, access to it is
> a precondition for open source software.  Hence, the term "open
> source."
> 
> Now, some of you might exclaim: "What does that have to do with me?
> I'm not a programmer.  I just want to use nice software that's free or
> available at a reasonable price."
> 
> It might help if we take a step back and tackle it by way of a
> commonplace analogy: cookies.  Not the kind that goes into your web
> browser, but the kind that's yummy and gets all crumbly when you eat
> it.
> 
> Let's say that in the course of your gastronomical experiments, you've
> hit upon a wonderful new recipe for a cookie.  It's so good that
> everyone who's tasted it wants more.  So what do you do?  You have two
> options before you.
> 
> One: you could keep the cookie recipe a secret, bake the cookies
> yourself, sell your product, and make a nice profit out of your
> labors.  You can price the cookies as high as you want because no one
> else is able to make them quite like you do.
> 
> Or two: you could give out the cookie recipe so that other people can
> bake their own cookies.  You can still sell your cookies, but now
> other people can even sell them in competition to you.  They are free
> to make improvements on your recipe with the precondition that they
> also give away those improved recipes.  In turn, you can also make and
> sell cookies based on these recipe variations.
> 
> Which option is right and which option is wrong?  Well, neither,
> really.  You're free to do as you choose, depending on the
> circumstances. 
> 
> If you take the first path, you will be able to sell more cookies, and
> that's a good thing.  On the downside, there isn't going to be as much
> variety on the market and after a while your recipe could get, well,
> stale.  And who's to say that somewhere down the line there won't be
> someone else who can match your cookie recipe?
> 
> If you take the second path, you won't get to sell as much as when you
> had a monopoly, and that might not be so good for you financially.
> But there'll be more cookie recipes out in the market, some of which
> may be even better than your original and which you can bake for
> yourself.  And overall, the prices of cookies will be lower because
> many more people can make them (and you might even choose to buy from
> someone else who can bake them better).  
> 
> The analogies should be obvious enough: cookies stand for software,
> and the cookie recipe is the source code.  While it's alright to keep
> the source code for yourself -- and there may be good reason for doing
> so --  it opens up a whole avenue of wonderful possibilities if you
> open it up.  
> 
> Now, put yourself in another role.  Say that you don't bake cookies
> yourself, but you do like to eat them.  As a dedicated cookie
> connoisseur, Which of the two situations above do you think would be
> better for you?  Again, it's alright to buy from someone with a secret
> recipe, wouldn't it be better to create an environment where you get
> more variety and at lower prices?
> 
> The same analogy can hold for software as well.  This is the promise
> that open source presents: more variety, and at more affordable
> prices.
> 
> So you see, that's why, even if you're not a developer, open source
> ought to mean something to you.  And even if you are just a user, try
> to find some means of contributing to open source: using the software,
> reporting bugs, and getting other people to use it.
> 
> _________________________________________________________
> Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Newbie Mailing List
> [email protected] (#PLUG @ irc.free.net.ph)
> Read the Guidelines: http://linux.org.ph/lists
> Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph
-- 
eman
http://www.bloodpet.tk/ || http://www.bloodpet.dsl.ph/
gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 4C683E4C
Registered Linux User #287022
+63(2)455-3222
Books just wanna be FREE!
See what I mean at:
http://bookcrossing.com/friend/bloodpet

_________________________________________________________
Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Newbie Mailing List
[email protected] (#PLUG @ irc.free.net.ph)
Read the Guidelines: http://linux.org.ph/lists
Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQBDixcsLVRiw0xoPkwRAuabAJkBM7NHbZX3qZP+4Z8kSLnxtzrH0gCfWSse
vyctdj8+5F+Nlql9GTQOFkw=
=XrkB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----