GNU/Linux

[Mikey]

I just watched the documentation Revolution OS. I find it highly recommendable! The Synopsis:

REVOLUTION OS tells the inside story of the hackers who rebelled against the proprietary software model and Microsoft to create GNU/Linux and the Open Source movement.

On June 1, 2001, Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer said "Linux is a cancer that attaches itself in an intellectual property sense to everything it touches."

Microsoft fears GNU/Linux, and rightly so. GNU/Linux and the Open Source & Free Software movements arguably represent the greatest threat to Microsoft's way of life. [...]

I transcribed a few quotes from this documentation. It really looks as if the Free Software Movement came into play to balance Microsoft (STO vs. STS battle?). But judge for yourself:

The crucial thing of GNU is, that it is free software. Free software refers not to price, but to freedom, so think of "free speech", not of "free beer". The freedoms I talk about are the freedoms to make changes if you want to, or hire somebody to make changes for you -- if you are using the software for your business -- to redistribute copies, to share with other people, and to make improvements and publish them so that other people get the benefit of them too. Those are the freedoms that distinguish free software from non free software. These are the freedoms that enable people to form a community. If you don't have all these freedoms you're divided and dominated by somebody.

If we put the software in the Public Domain, somebody else would be able to make a little bit of changes and turn that into a proprietary software package, which means that the users will be running our software but wouldn't have the freedom to cooperate and share. To prevent that, we use a technique called "copyleft". The idea of copyleft is, that it is copyright flipped over. What we do is, we say: “This software is copyrighted, and we, the authors, give you permission to redistribute copies, we give you permission to change it, to add to it, but if you redistribute it, it has to be under the same terms, no more and no less. So, whoever gets it from you, also gets the freedom to cooperate with other people if he wants to. And then, everywhere the software goes, the freedom goes too and becomes an inalienable right to cooperate with other people to form a community.

[The GNU Public Licence], which Richard Stallman wrote, is a really astounding contribution. It is one of the few software licenses that was written from the standpoint of the community rather than from the standpoint of a company, or – as is the case with the MIT or BSD licence – performing the goals of a government program. The GPL is really unique in that. It is not just a licence, it is a whole philosophy [...]

A crucial step in the growth of GNU, Linux and the Free Software Movement was the creation of businesses based on that software philosophy.

From the beginning of the free software movement I've had the idea that there is room in it for business to be done. One of the advantages of Free Software is that there is a free market for any kind of service or support. So if you are using Free Software in your Business and you want support, you have a choice of people to go to for it. So, in general, they have to give you good support or you go to somebody else. With proprietary software, support is a monopoly; one company, typically, that has the source code, and only they can give you support. So, typically you are at the mercy of a monopoly, which is for one example the case with Microsoft, and that is why their support is so bad.

Questioner: “What is Linux's relationship to the GNU project?”

Linus Torvalds: “Well, there are relationships to GNU on multiple levels. One is just the philosophical level of thinking that making our source open is a good idea."

Questioner: “Are you now, or have you ever been, a member of the Communist Party?”

Richard Stallman: “When I was a kid and went to school, teachers were trying to teach us to share. They said, 'if you bring some candy, you can't eat all yourself, you've got to share with the other kids.' But now the administration order their teachers to teach to the kids to say yes to licensing: If you bring software to the school, they say: 'Oh no, don't share! Sharing means, you're a pirate. Sharing means, you'll be put into jail.' That is not the way society should work. We need the good will, the willingness to help other people, at least when it's not too hard, because that's the basis of society, that's the fundamental resource that gives us a society instead of a dog-eat-dog jungle.”

There are a lot more interesting interviews and quotes in this documentation. An interesting fact is, that the Free Software Movement resulted in lawsuits against Microsoft, because the people wanted to get refunds for their unused Windows installation-CDs that were delivered by default with PCs.

I was a long-time Windows user, but switched to Ubuntu Linux several months ago. I was, and still am, astonished how mature and well done it is (I am certain, the same is also true of other GNU/Linux distributions).

Popular Programs that are Open Source Software:

OpenOffice.org - replacement for MS Office Word, Excel, Powerpoint, Access
Apache - HTTP web server (about 50% market share)
Mozilla Firefox - browser (about 46% market share)

 

[RyanX]

Thanks for this Data. I've been a fan of Linux and it's various distributions for a long time, although most of my experience has been in the server as opposed to the desktop realm. A Linux server - if properly configured - runs like an appliance. Whereas Windows servers tends to need a lot of "babysitting".

As an IT professional, I like how Linux makes me feel somewhat useful at my profession. Sure the software is free, but most businesses know next to nothing about setting it up and maintaining it, so they typically pay consultants to set it up and install it for them. That's not to say the information isn't out there for them to learn, it's just a matter of time/money/resources. The nice thing is, as a computer consultant, I can charge for my time/knowledge/expertise in Linux and know I'm giving customers a highly stable product and feel some overall satisfaction with my job. With Microsoft servers, one is more or less a glorified computer mechanic. There's no "soul" to the end product or the work done.

I'll have to check out this documentary.

 

[Buddy]

Stallman is right on, in my view and that Scandanavian, Linus Torvalds, is a hero to the creative hacker community. Notice I didn't say "hacker", I said 'creative hacker', as opposed to the criminal type. (Stallman's 'Questioner' take note :) ).

I use Windows and Linux for different reasons and at different times, but my favorite will always be slackware linux: the full installation as well as all the specialty and bootable cd-rom versions (Austrumi 1.8.0 rocks! ). Slackware is the ultimate in stability to me, but Ubuntu is excellent and probably next on the list, followed by Fedora and all that jazz!

Thanks for sharing that, Data!

 

[Rich]

Thanks Data, This will be useful in my current teaching of intellectual property issues and Open-source software vs propriety. I'm also a big fan of Ubuntu, takes a while to get to grips with but well worth the effort.

 

[dant]

Right on, Data!

I have been a long time Linux user and everything I personally
know about the many different OSes and systems in the beginning
was that "they" (STS) wanted to proprietrize everything "they" could
so as to hog the pie all for themselves and the charge huge license fees
to an exclusive club. Many players such as R. Stallman (GNU) and
many others wanted HW/SW to be available to the community for a
very long time, later including Torvalds (Linux) and others, and it was
a battle, likened to David vs Goliath, if I recall history well.

Many corporations tried to "taint" the community effort by slipping
in proprietary code (false flags?) in an effort generate lawsuits with
the aim to completely destroy the "free software community".

Most of the (software) ideas that went into the proprietary software
was for the most part taken from the Academia (and other times from
either corporations, small business owners, or from individuals only
to be paid off or ripped off), were modified from the core-base
to be further expanded in order to become "their own creations",
or so I think.

The evolution is very interesting from a historic point of view - as
Systems/Software evolved from big mainframes and eventually lead
to PCs; it was interesting to see the players that were involved in the
effort to push Systems/Software for the benefit of the community, as
we have it now. "They" (STO) have come a long way against the
"them" (STS?) - although, it is not perfect enough that users can
be completely weaned away from the predatory corporations? It
is up to "normal people" to choose...

For example, who wants to give up Microsoft's Office suite and
how is it that many of these proprietary software/hardware keeps
it's users (victims?) firmly in the grips of these corporations?

And so the silent battle continues...

[Edit: I have used many linux distros, and my favorite, in order, is
UBuntu, Fedora.

Ubuntu supports long-term stability before the software become
"Unsupported" I find this distro more user-friendly, and for the
most part easier on those who are not completely computer geeky ;)

Fedora, for the most part is heavily weighted towards Developers (imo),
because it is "bleeding edge" and can become unstable at various
times, and is not generally intended for those with "production" systems.
Fedora OSes lifetime is generally "6 months" depending on the problems
of it's releases. it can be much shorter, and then it becomes "Unsupported".
]

FWIW,
Dan

 

[Vulcan59]

Just two days ago, there was a report of a school here that ditched Microsoft software for open source software. (Source) What I couldn't believe is that this report mentions that the government still ends up paying MS even though the school doesn't use any MS software!

Ditching Microsoft is highly unusual within the NZ education sector, as a long-standing contract with the national government means the software giant is paid for technology for the school even though none has been used. Microsoft's dominance also means that most planning documents for education presume an Microsoft infrastructure.

 

[dant]

Just two days ago, there was a report of a school here that ditched Microsoft software for open source software. (Source) What I couldn't believe is that this report mentions that the government still ends up paying MS even though the school doesn't use any MS software!

Ditching Microsoft is highly unusual within the NZ education sector, as a long-standing contract with the national government means the software giant is paid for technology for the school even though none has been used. Microsoft's dominance also means that most planning documents for education presume an Microsoft infrastructure.

This is not new, however, as many others have done the same, to ditch M$/Apple/IBM for Linux.
It was a slow burning fire, getting faster, and M$ starting to run scared.

Also - M$ charges HORRENDOUS support fees on a per-incident case. It was not
that long ago those fees were close to $!50US (more or less) depending on the "incident"
and the current fee I heard was $59.00US - but honestly - it is a gimick to snare
the user into more incidents. They call the shots what an incident means.

But when it comes to SERVERS - licenses/support fees are "out of this world!!"

M$ deliberately LOCKS in users - you can see this when you are FORCED to mount
your HDD (C:) in ONE PLACE - and guess what - unless you use a third-party
software backup and restore, you are FORCED to reinstall not only the OS itself
but all other software you installed afterwards and restore "bits and pieces", one
at a time. M$ does NOT do a TRUE backup and restore - your drive is "WIRED"
in the hardware (software really). Now, there is a third party B/R available that
allows one to do a B/R and install it on *any drive* and any *partition*, even into
Virtual Machines. I found this out the hard way, and as I mentioned in my FOTCM
posting - it was entropic and painful. The B/R software I refer to is Acronis and
for XP/Vista the fee is $59.99 with a 30-day, full product, try & buy it! But when
it comes to SERVERS - it is expensive!

I had NO SUCH PROBLEM with Linux. It is NOT LOCKED IN. But knowing how to
do this takes learning time as for the rest of how linux works....

I could extend this LOCK IN FEATURE to other corporations, such as
Apple.... but do you get the big picture? (this is a rhetorical question
not directed to anyone in particular)

 

[Buddy]

This is not new, however, as many others have done the same, to ditch M$/Apple/IBM for Linux.
It was a slow burning fire, getting faster, and M$ starting to run scared.

Also - M$ charges HORRENDOUS support fees on a per-incident case. It was not
that long ago those fees were close to $!50US (more or less) depending on the "incident"
and the current fee I heard was $59.00US - but honestly - it is a gimick to snare
the user into more incidents. They call the shots what an incident means.

But when it comes to SERVERS - licenses/support fees are "out of this world!!"

It was just a matter of time until Gates brought M$ to the brink of a gravity well, osit. If he'd upped the technical quality of his stuff - maybe even give away a little here and there like Sun and Netscape did, then maybe he could have helped create a value-added ecology where others could contribute stuff and grow a more vibrant industry, but no. Gates was all about the dollar. Everybody must pay mucho. No one must get anything without paying mucho and no one must connect with his stuff without mucho permissions and mucho payment.

The thing is, I don't begrudge him his fortune, I just think he isolated himself from the very people he was supposedly serving and wouldn't let a natural creative technological interaction occur. His business model could be summed up like a wind-up doll that walks around bumping into walls and everytime it stops, it says "Gimme a dollar, Get away from me; Gimme a dollar, Get away from me; Gimme a dollar..."

At least the folks who love a clickable interface also have the option of Apple computers because their GUI sits on top of a Unix-like operating system.


Edit: grammar

 

[durabone]

Right on! Love Gnu!
Did the film mention that many
allege that Gates broke
the license of Stallman's
original os Cpm, to create
Dos, simultaneously destoying
the 1st free Sw group?

 

[Mikey]

As an IT professional, I like how Linux makes me feel somewhat useful at my profession. Sure the software is free, but most businesses know next to nothing about setting it up and maintaining it, so they typically pay consultants to set it up and install it for them. That's not to say the information isn't out there for them to learn, it's just a matter of time/money/resources. The nice thing is, as a computer consultant, I can charge for my time/knowledge/expertise in Linux and know I'm giving customers a highly stable product and feel some overall satisfaction with my job. With Microsoft servers, one is more or less a glorified computer mechanic. There's no "soul" to the end product or the work done.

I agree. The overall GNU effort is an effort of people -- not of money hungry corporations -- and that can be somehow felt. I also like the amount of control it gives the user, and that is, as you say, satisfying. I am also an IT consultant and I'm arranging a Linux seminar for normal PC users in spring.

I use Windows and Linux for different reasons and at different times, but my favorite will always be slackware linux: the full installation as well as all the specialty and bootable cd-rom versions (Austrumi 1.8.0 rocks! ).

I've never tried Slackware Linux. But it's true, the installation of Ubuntu (and probably most other larger distros) really is a piece of cake. As you say, one can even try Linux by booting from the CD-ROM, without changes to your computer!

"They" (STO) have come a long way against the
"them" (STS?) - although, it is not perfect enough that users can
be completely weaned away from the predatory corporations? It
is up to "normal people" to choose...

For example, who wants to give up Microsoft's Office suite and
how is it that many of these proprietary software/hardware keeps
it's users (victims?) firmly in the grips of these corporations?

As in other areas, most people aren't really aware that there are alternatives. They just take it for granted. I actively try to spread the word.

Just two days ago, there was a report of a school here that ditched Microsoft software for open source software.

I am also teaching College Computer Science and I convinced the director of using OpenOffice for the whole school! It was not difficult because Microsoft Office 2007 would have cost several thousand Euros. And I will be installing Ubuntu Linux on the PCs of the IT lab together with the students, so that they can see something new and make a choice for themselves.

But knowing how to do this takes learning time as for the rest of how linux works....

I would say that for private, non-experienced, long-time-Windows-users, it is not difficult at all to use Linux distributions; the desktop environment is the same; the keyboard shortcuts are largely the same; managing files is the same. It is true that Linux systems have a great learning potential -- but only if you want to do something special and dig deeper. But then, that's true for everything.

 

[durabone]

[quote author=Data]I am also teaching College Computer Science and I convinced the director of using OpenOffice for the whole school![/quote]

Hey Data, I ran into a bunch of guys in Perugia, Italy in 2007 doing the same thing. Congrats. They had focussed in on businesses as well.

I'm struggling with the fact that both mysql and OpenOffice were recently bought by Oracle as part of Sun.

 

[D69]

I'm struggling with the fact that both mysql and OpenOffice were recently bought by Oracle as part of Sun.

Imo they won't do anything either with MySQL or with OpenSolaris , that would basically mean that Postgresql takes the whole pie.
Also OpenSolaris is a training ground before major Solaris releases and Oracle needs a stable UNIX system , thats why they bought SUN , to get an OS.

 

[durabone]

drygol! Right on!

[quote author=drygol]that would basically mean that Postgresql takes the whole pie[/quote]
[quote author=drygol]Oracle needs a stable UNIX system[/quote]

Thanks for those notions!

 

[dant]

To whom this may concern:
what is your favorite Linux Distro?

I have used, in order of exposure:

1: Redhat: Used initially, but switched to Fedora at some
point due to friendliness and ease of installation.

2: Fedora (based on: Redhat)

Status:
v9 seems to be "more stable", than v10, v11 so I am holding onto v9 & v11 for now.

Notes:
1) Fedora does not have long-term support and recycles approx 6 months.
2) v9 is no longer supported, only v11/v12 is supported and v13 is coming soon.

Problems: (Your mileage may vary based on your hardware)
1) Xorg monitor/screen resolutions detection for Intel chips may not
work in default boot mode: may require 'nomodeset' on boot kernel line.
2) Saving desktop settings are inconsistent.
3) Screensaver may cause hangs and may require hard-boot to regain access.
Disabling screensaver does seems to prevent hangs but exposes your system
to local access.

3: Debian: Used initially, but switched to Ubuntu at some
point due to friendliness and ease of installation.

4: Ubuntu (based on: Debian)

Status: v9.04 seems to "more stable" than v9.10, but I am using v9.10
in hopes that these problems will be resolved.

Notes:
1) Long term support is available

Problems: (Your mileage may vary based on your hardware)
1) v9.10 Networking is not very stable as opposed to v9.04. Some
are calling for major re-examination and overall design reviews for better
coordination/integration of networking components w/ each other.

For example, introduction of 'resolvconf' may cause DNS resolver problems and may
cause your (networking dependent) applications useless due to "auto-reconfiguration"
of /etc/resolv.conf. Seems to cause major confusion among end-users.

5: Other:
1) Gentoo: Too strange for me, so I abandoned it. This was some years ago and
I have not since revisited it.

Kind regards!
Dan

 

[durabone]

I like ease of package management. To me that means Ubuntu. The reason they name them "Jaunty Jackelope" etc. is because typing |jaunty package packagename (eg: wireshark)| etc. will take you to http://packages.ubuntu.com/jaunty/wireshark. This system they have is outstanding. As for 9.1 v 9.0.4, they do release on schedule, and unfortunately that means with bugs. Like when I first installed 9.1, bash history was lost from prior sessions. Since we are building both Ubuntu and Xubuntu systems, we lag a release or two once we get stable.