Re: Open Source code assurance
- I think your piece has captured the strengths of the alternative O/Ss
quite well... In fact, I can just imagine Microsoft-West Indies & Co.
quaking in their boots because of the sudden thrust for alternate O/S
awareness... Even in what could transpire through such awareness and
may even spread throughout the region...
Given that the west indies is no different from other regions
Microsoft has tried to de-rail Linux movements in, I think it'll be
presumable M$ will be realeasing some sort of P.R. to counter this
article. Or perhaps they'll offer some sort of "sweetheart deal" or
temporary "sale" to quell anxyities in hopes it'll all blow over.
None-the-less one point for the movement is that it's also fair to
think most companies would probably be willing to experiment before
they actually dub a flat out "no" to opting for an atleast partial
Linux environment. At least having a partial environment allows those
companies to keep costs in check.
On a completely side note. Something I also observed in reguards to
that Peru article. Dully noted- this is a "Microsoft world". I mean
that in the sense that Linux developers are building in eclipsing
shaddow of the Windows consumer base. Given that, the a many of the
alternative OSes are beginning to have all kinds of programs for
interoperability with Microsoft standards.
Example: Linux has Samba for working/playing nicely with Microsoft
There really is getting to be allot of software to allow individuals
to be somewhat interoperable with this "microsoft planet".
That means somewhere down-the-road after a company were to go
partially Linux(or other options) sooner or later those corporations
maybe able to leave the Windows area completely. And those
interoperable programs should still allow them to hopefully keep up
with other companies/individuals that are still windows environments.
I notice in Microsoft's argument towards Peru's they didn't mention
that more then likely there will probably be *some* form of software
already out-in-the-wild that would make the current Microsoft cached
data interoperable with Linux. Or if not, Peru can still outsource a
small developer contract to write some...
If an individual is willing to take some time, any data eventually can
be extracted from a windows environment.
Something namely the linux community has to put up with is that some--
places will be stubborn in not switching and in the meantime- there
must be different means provided to still be able to do business with
the other 95%+/- percent of the planet running Windows.
So much of the propaganda in that article about. "it'll cost soo much
to switch. And you wont be able to do anything with current data on
windows is incorrect." Chances are there'll be ways it can be
procured from those few windows based systems.
If not, you can easily do something like make an intranet enabled or
browser based application on the old system to query through the old
data... And with some creativity it can probably be made to look
totally normal. Think about it. Some places still use the older Vax
systems which are as old as dirty-- and plenty of places still have
them interfacing with lost of new equipment.
Anyway, paying for conversion as an immediate cost is like investing
in a new suit prior to going to a job interview. It maybe an upfront
cost but it's better then going in with a wrip white T-shirt and
jeans. If one doesn't cough up a little something to convert then
they're guaranteeing year after year that X-amount of all profits will
be going almost like a utility bill to M$.
In other words: If you don't convert you pay. If you do convert you
pay a small bit. But soon there after you become the master of your
own domain. After all. An operating system is needed to interface
with your hardware. Why should you have to pay for a processor and
have to pay for the OS too??? You need both, so shouldn't it be a
package deal. :-)
Linux isn't suposed to be tallied as Free as in like someone offering
"free beer" but allot of the time it's "low cost" to obtain- can be an
added perk to making the switch. More often then not you can get
basic packages to do basic things. And if you choose you can pay a
small something for overly enhanced things. :-) Most of the time the
open source/public domain offerings will be adequate.
--- In TTLUG@y..., "Richard Jobity" <richjob@c...> wrote:
> As you may be aware, the open source movement have been advising its
clients of the various open source licenses in response to inaccurate
claims by other companies
> that these licenses lead to code contamination. I would like to
take this opportunity to ensure that you understand this model and
that you are aware of the options that
> exist for your organization and how you can add value to your
company by taking advantage of this new model.
> There is only be one way of obtaining this type of software license.
> (1) Code Assurance
> Code Assurance You will be able to obtain a full open source
license for any product covered under an open source license, such as
the BSD, X11, MPL, and GNU GPL
> licenses. This license is a perpetual license and allows you to use
that software forever or as long as you want to. It does not expire
and you install on it
> as many computers as you wish. You obtain binary code, full source
code and software updates for the life of the product.
> In addition, you have full permission to review, amend, reproduce
and redistribute the code subject to the conditions of the open source
license you use.
> Implicit in this type of licensing is permission to obtain the most
recent updates with full source code, without the need to obtain a
separate licenses for each update.
> Support for the packages covered is covered under many options.
Commercial support for open source can be purchased from leading
companies, e.g. IBM and Sun.
> Alternatively, companies interesting in exploring the Linux (TM)
option can purchase a distribution and support from the maker of that
> While open source is not for everyone, you do have choices. You can
choose the open software with the license that is right for you. You
can even choose to purchase a
> "license" for proprietary software, if you believe that is the
right choice for you.
> However, we of the open source movement believe that the ability of
the user to control the data is far more vital than the need of a
company to keep data formats as a
> "moving target". As a result, open source applications use open
formats with clear specifications not controlled by any one company,
while maintaining backward
> compatibility with legacy proprietary applications
> For further information on these licensing models please feel free
> to visit
> As usual, I am also available to assist in any query that may arise.
> Richard Jobity
> Trinidad and Tobago.
> Be sure it's Linux...
> P.S. Please feel free to forward this mail to anyone who may
be interested in learning more about making an informed decision based
on the options above.