Loosely speaking, open source software is free, as in liberty, often as in beer,
powerful, ad-free and scumware-free, and it
is great fun. In this page I'll provide a brief
explanation of what open source is and talk
at greater length about why open source is A
Good Thing.
Open source software is software for which the source code is available. (Source code is the stuff that the coders write in programming languages). Open source is usually, but not always, free (as in money and as in liberty). Likewise, not all free (as in money) software is open source. The best open source software is "free" as in "liberty" - there are no draconian licences or restrictions and no licence tracking to bother with. If you only use free open source software then you are not at risk from pseudo-legal "anti-piracy" organisations that can raid your property/premises, audit you, and fine you if you have made a mistake. Incidentally, if such an organisation does attempt to gain access, do not let them in! (possibly unless you live in the USA: in the states, crazy rights are granted to corporations to attack their customers. Elsewhere they have no legal entry rights. Proprietary End User Licence Agreements (EULA) that come with non-open-source software says that corporations are allowed to raid you. That includes Microsoft).
There
is a frightening trend for proprietary products to contain
"copy protection" and other DRM restrictions that
stops you doing what you want to do. Want to back up a CD? Proprietary software
may prevent you from doing so. Free open
source software is free of such annoyances, because
open source advocates do not like them, and nor do most intelligent
people. We prefer liberty.
Much open source software is released under
the GPL (Gnu Public Licence). This means
that if you change and distribute the software
then you can charge for it if you like, but
it is compulsory to publish the source code
and give it away free. For example SUSE sell
Linux in shrink-wrapped form, but
you can download exactly the same software for
free from their website. Debian has excellent download options. It is morally better
to pay for such software, or donate money to
Open Source projects: this is one way to do our bit,
put something back and feel good :)
GPL software is vastly varied, ranging from
entire operating systems (Linux) to the most
common web server on the Internet (Apache) to
browsers and email clients (e.g. Mozilla) to an entire
office suit (Open Office). Open GL applications
run on a variety of platforms and operating
systems, reversing the trend of vendor lock-in.
I will return to GPL again soon, but first,
is open source software good software?
Perhaps counterintuitively, open source applications
are generally of a superior quality to the equivalent
proprietary applications. There are various
reasons for the advantage of open source software
(and I should insert the cautionary phrase "generally
speaking" in front of each of these
points):
People enjoy writing open
source software: professionals aside, most are not in it for
the money. The sense of
achievement, the pleasure of giving, of
having others use your software is fine compensation. It is hard
to underestimate the kudos that comes with
being an open source developer. People are
more likely to write quality software when
it is a labour of love.
There is a myth that open source applications are written by adolescents in bedrooms. The reality is that people who write open source software are more usually professional and experienced programmers who are either paid by their employers to work on open source projects or they are self employed consultants that develop open source code from which they make a living. Alternatively many professionals work on open source projects in their spare time. They do this for the pleasure of it or because they want to add their own functionality or fix a bug.
Many organisations fund the development of open source because they use it and make money out of it. Indeed many open source projets started out as proprietary projects that were subsequently released under an open source licence. They do this to popularise their product, thereby squeezing competitors; to lower the costs of its development and maintenance; and even to generate good will, which means good PR.
It is generally believed that most major open source is more thoroughly tested
for bugs than proprietary software equivalents. Bugs
are usually fixed more rapidly.
Conversely, proprietary software (which is owned
by corporations) has disadvantages compared
to open source software because
Proprietary software is generally less secure than
open source equivalents. Proprietary software is usually
closed source (you can't read the source
code, although all closed source can be
"decompiled"). This has the unexpected
result that closed source software is less
secure than open source software that is
freely available. This is not intuitive,
but the reason is simple. To attack code
you do not need to read the source! You
simply probe the binary code for weaknesses
and exploit them. This is the default modus
operandi of most attacks. Reading the source
is very useful for fixing security bugs
but is less useful for devising attacks.
Truly secure software is secure regardless
of whether you can see the source code or
not. Hence open source has a natural advantage
over closed source.
Corporations are riddled with managers
that tend to be non-technical. Their poorly-informed
decisions often lead to dismal engineering
practices that in turn lead to terrible
software. I've seen this first hand, and
there is much anecdotal evidence to back
this up.
Proprietary software applications tend
to use file formats that are closed. This
means your precious data is locked into
the whims of corporations that care only
about profit, and not about your data. Think
carefully before you attach
MS Word docs to emails. It is infinitely
better to use open file formats,
like plain text, HTML, PDF, or Open Document Format. Open
Office documents are in Open Document Format by default.
Proprietary software has been known to
contain "spyware". (Including
Windows XP, which contacts Microsoft's servers
each time you search your hard disk). In
open source software, where anyone can and
does examine the code, spyware and "back
doors" - code that grants hackers access
to your machine - cannot hide and so they
are less likely to be submitted or survive for long. Unfortunately
this is not the case for proprietary software.
Proprietary software tends to be less
reliable than open source because the latter
is usually more thoroughly tested. Project
schedule and budgetary pressures limit the
amount of testing that can be performed
by a corporation. Open source software is
not compromised by such constraints.
It is ironic that Microsoft rabidly attacks
the open source movement, yet the most notoriously
insecure software on the planet is made
by Microsoft. Think Windows, think IE, think
IIS, think Outlook. Microsoft systems are
cracked by hackers more often than any equivalent
systems. Microsoft products also facilitate
the spread of viruses, trojans, worms and
other nasties more than any other vendor
in history. For example, even though IIS
is used on fewer machines than the open
source web server Apache, IIS is hacked
much more frequently. I would never
trust Microsoft products if I needed to
secure my systems. However I would
put my trust into proven open source products
like Linux and Apache. (But remember, security
is more of a process than a thing, as the
mantra goes).
Returning to the GPL (Gnu Public Licence), GPL
is a good thing, because it prevents corporations
from ripping off GPL open source software. It
means corporations cannot parasitically profiteer
from the hard work of others without giving
anything back. Microsoft have done this on numerous
occasions. MS Internet Explorer is ripped off
from the non-GPL Spyglass browser, and the TCP/IP
stack in Windows is ripped off from the Open
BSD operating system (which is also not GPL).
Microsoft cannot rip off Linux or Apache code
because they are protected by GPL. If corporations
like Microsoft insert open source algorithms
into a product then they are obliged to publish
the source code of that product. One or two
corporations (mainly Microsoft) don't like GPL
because it prevents them from ripping off free
software, but GPL benefits everybody else. Microsoft
also corrupts standards by "embracing and
extending". They use their monopoly to
produce their own standards that, through deliberate
inconsistencies and extensions, kill the old
one. GPL helps prevent this simply because Microsoft
is afraid of GPL.
More enlightened corporations (no mega-corp
is good, mind you) are using the GPL to their
own advantage. IBM, HP and others are using
Linux to great effect, for example by selling
Linux-based systems. Corporations can make money
out of GPL by offering services and consultancy
around GPL products. After all the cost of the
software can often be a small fraction of the
cost of ownership. (There is no evidence that
open source has a higher cost of ownership than
software you pay for. Given that open source
software is more secure and reliable, the cost
of ownership is probably lower than for proprietary
systems). And all of us, not just corporations
are free to find ways of making money from GPL
software too. Everyone is a winner except those
unpleasant corporations (chiefly Microsoft,
whose "shared source" initiative comes
with some disagreeable strings attached) who
smear the GPL movement in a misguided attempt
to preserve their antiquated business models
and ill-gotten monopolies.
Then we have Microsoft's astonishing attempts to corrupt ISO into fast tracking it's truly horrible "OOXML" document "standard". Notice how MS have apparently tried to make OOXML seem as if it is short for "Open Office" XML to confuse matters. The genuine, existing and ubiquitously supported open document standard is ODF, which Open Office and other office suits (except MS Office) supports. In contrast, Microsoft's proprietary OOXML is not even a standard, as literally no one can implement it, not even Microsoft! This shameless fiasco is another illustration for the need for genuinely open standards, which are at least as important than open source. ODF is a genuine standard for documents, but Microsoft opposes the genuinely open standard for business reasons - it will have to compete on competence, not vendor lock-in. All governments should insist on ODF for all documentation that concerns, and/or is paid for by the tax payer. Corps should use it too. And we would all be better off using it. Then our data is safe and accessible for far into the future.
You might notice that I do not like Microsoft
:) But I am not profiting from my stance: my
opinion is such because Microsoft is predatory
and anti-competitive in its behaviour. The latest
atrocity by Microsoft is the "Palladium"
project (renamed "Next Generation Secure
Computing Base") as described here
and here.
Your computer belongs to Microsoft. Note: the next version of Windows (Vista) will be crippled with "DRM" (Digital Rights Management) as a result of such thinking.
This page is my way of trying to throw my support
(however insignificant it may be) behind the
open source movement. The GPL is under attack
from Microsoft: the FUD (Fear, Uncertainty,
Doubt) that Microsoft is spreading about Open
Source software (they are behind the SCO
debacle) is shameless propaganda.
If you would like to submit any articles or
comments in support of open source, please let
me know.
One of the great sensations you get with open
source software is that of the freedom that
comes with genuine ownership. When you use proprietary
software the licence agreement legalese usually
says something to the effect that you are renting
the software - you do not own the software.
You are not allowed to copy it or change it
or redistribute it without permission from the
corporation. In welcome contrast, GPL software
is yours, and you can do with it what
you like, as long as you release the source
code again if you have modified it and
are redistributing it. That is a small and reasonable
term. The reason it exists is because it guarantees
that the software will be free and freely available.
Forever. Proprietary licences rarely if ever
allow you the liberty of the GPL licence.
Another real pleasure of Open Source is the
sense of goodwill. People use open software
and often they like to put something back. They
might write a Linux driver for a piece of hardware,
or publish a utility they have written under
GPL, or join one of the many open source projects
out there. In a lonely and alienating world,
there is something heartening about seeing people
pull together.
GPL is symbolic of freedom in a world of nightmarish
corporate greed and intrusion. There is hope!
Above all else, open source software is making
computing fun again. Long live GPL!
Update: we must pressure our politicians to
make it LAW to move all documents to open standards
that may be read perfectly by Open Office, without
convoluted macros that lock that document into
MS Office. In this way, anyone that needs to
can read that document without having to buy
Windows and MS Office. Keeping documents and
templates in MS format is not cheap either,
because MS routinely change their document formats
and stop supporting old office formats. This
is because they need to encourage users to abandon
old Office versions and buy the latest version.
So moving to an Open Standard that is freely
read by any application, not just Microsoft
applications, is actually cheaper in the long
run, as you don't need to keep up with the Microsoft
format treadmill. It benefits us, the people,
and not the corporate Microsoft.
For non-American governments, using tax payer's
money to buy government software from the richest
nation on the planet, hence sacrificing the
local economy, is absurd. Again, open source
software can be supported by companies that
exist within the government's own country, and
hence the tax payer's loot stays within the
country, and is more likely to end up back in
the tax payer's pocket, sooner or later.
Microsoft are panicking about Governments moving
to open source standards and open source software.
The head of sales at Microsoft, Orlando Ayala,
has instructed his salesmen: "Under NO
circumstances lose against Linux". Presumably,
if you are a big fish, MS will pay you to use
its products, which would be illegal. In Germany
the city of Munich has decreed that the city
be run on Linux, Open Office, and other OS software.
Microsoft's CEO, Steve Ballmer, cancelled a
skiing trip to try to persuade the Munich Officials
to reconsider. (He lowered the licence fees
by a considerable amount, which is an illegal
monopolistic practice, akin to dumping). The
Munich officials are sticking to their decision
to endorse open source software. This battle
needs to be fought and won by all government
departments. There is no longer any excuse for
governments to spend our money enriching Microsoft
at our expense for an inferior product, especially
when that means our data is locked in closed
formats under Microsoft's control. Please support
this cause, it is in our interests if we are
to fight corporate domination of our lives,
and remain free.
Microsoft is fighting dirty though. A recent,
unpleasant MS ruse has been to allegedly encourage
SCO to attack Linux by suing IBM, and threatening
Linus Torvalds, creator of Linux, with a law
suit. IBM and Novel will crush SCO, but SCO
might scare a few naive bosses off Linux in
the short term, which MS hopes will buy it some
time. The whole thing is back-firing though,
because the storm is making people aware that
Linux is to be taken very seriously indeed as
an alternative to Windows. Open source must
fight hard, because Microsoft is a relentless
foe. And Microsoft fights dirtily and illegally,
as anti-trust suits have officially proven.
(Note for developers: if they tell you Linux
is not scalable, point out that Google
is run on Linux, Perl and Python, and scales
to hundreds of millions of users. Google said
that alternative, proprietary solutions would
not scale! On the other hand, MS Windows not so scalable, once you get above just a few machines).
Open
Source Links
The list of links below is a
bit ad hoc and neither complete nor representative of all the
excellent open source sites. Please tell
me of any good links to add below.
and Thunderbird email client from Mozilla. Firefox is superior to IE in all
respects. For more Mozilla info see Mozilla.org. I write about Firefox etc here. Alternatively see Sea Monkey for a suit of internet apps in one.
Free
office suit that runs on various platforms.
(Incidentally, on a whim, I just
converted a simple 73 KB Microsoft word document
into an Open Office 1.1 document. The
file size is now 14 KB, a fifth of the
size). Open Office is proficient at reading
and writing MS Office file formats. Sun
Microsystems released and Open Office
as open source, and support it. You can
buy a "commercial" version of
Open Office: Star
Office.
"Inkscape is an Open Source vector graphics editor, with capabilities similar to Illustrator, Freehand, CorelDraw, or Xara X using the W3C standard Scalable Vector Graphics (SVG) file format." Alternatively Xara Extreme is now open source on Linux/Unix, and has some advantages and some disadvantages over Inkscape, as one might expect of two sophisticated programs.
Meet people! Post messages. Invite friends! Post pictures! All of these things are possible with Slashster."
I joined, give it a go, it's interesting. Why not contact me, and I'll send you an invite.
Open
content (non-proprietary) online encyclopaedia. OK as a starting point for research, but the content can be unreliable. It's predecessor, Nupedia, quickly expired: this wikipedia link replaced the nupedia link as it happens.
A "professional" multitrack,
multichannel audio recorder and DAW for
Linux, using ALSA-supported audio interfaces.
Supports up to 32 bit samples, 24+ channels
at up to 96kHz, full MMC control, non-destructive,
non-linear editor, LADSPA plugins.
Open source isn't just for software: "Elephants Dream is the world's first open movie, made entirely with open source graphics software such as Blender, and with all production files freely available to use however you please, under a Creative Commons license."
"This list of Linux equivalents / replacements / analogs of Windows software is based on our own experience and on the information obtained from the visitors of this page".
The
greatest web server out there. Puts the
insecure IIS to shame.
Databases
MySQL
is a fast database supported by all ISP's.
This site uses MySQL. A less ubiquitous
but superior database is PostgreSQL
(pronounced Post-Grez-Sequel, PostgreSQL
is free-er than MySQL as it has no commercial
licence). Rekall
is not a database per se, but provides
a database front-end to extract, display
and update data.
Moodle is a education management system
for making course homepages with forums,
tests, chatrooms, etc. similar to Blackboard
and WebCT (both of which are very expensive).
Thanks to Tim for sending in that link.
Ogg
Vorbis is an open, patent-free, professional
audio encoding and streaming technology
(An open source equivalent of MP3). Ogg
is as good as or superior to MP3 in quality
especially at low bit rates. Ogg is new
so more software will appear over time.
Jabber
is an open messaging protocol, with advantages
over AIM, MSN, Yahoo etc. Jabba support
is one of the many protocols supported
by Miranda.
Miranda is a multi protocol instant messenger
client for Windows. KMess
is a Linux client for MSN messenger. I
must warn, though, that MSN behaves consistently with corporate evil, so don't be surprised
when they screw you over. By that,
I mean endless ads, spam, viruses, spyware,
etc. There are various other messenger
clients for Linux that talk IRC, Yahoo,
AOL, Jabber etc, these links are not exhaustive.
GNUnet
is a framework for secure peer-to-peer
networking. The primary application implemented
within the GNUnet framework is anonymous
censorship-resistant file-sharing.
"The vision of OpenISO.org is to become a truly open international standards organisation." Badly needed, especially due to Microsofts attempts to corrupt ISO into fast tracking it's truly horrible "OOXML" "standard". OOXML is not even a standard, as literally no one can implement it.
Linux
email tool. Filter out spam. Bounce feature
doesn't work on my system and primitive
UI. Perhaps too technical for newbies. Tip: be sure to delete the log file now and again.
You don't need to be a programmer in order to participate in contributing to open source. One way, if you use Linux, is you can help remove bugs from
Linux open source software.
Subversion is a source control program that improves on CVS, which is dying. Subversion integrates with Eclipse when you use Subclipse. Then there is Git, originally written by Linus Torvalds, who was dissatisfied with existing open source source control apps. The Linux kernel developers now use Git. (IBM's Rational ClearCase is worth a mention, but it is not open source at time of writing).
Linux
is an open source operating
system. I ditched Windows and use Linux - it is superior. There are many
"distributions" (or flavours)
of Linux including
Ubuntu,
Fedora,
Mandriva,
Debian,
etc.
Note, Ubuntu is the easiest Linux to use, and is powerful too. It is my favourite linux as of 2007. Linux is a superior, more powerful, more secure operating system than Microsoft Windows. Newbies may need a little assistance installing Linux, (or installing any operating system for that matter, including Windows, especially the woeful Vista).
Windows, at time of writing, has far more
games than Linux. Unlike windows however, many Linux flavours (distros) come complete with plenty of excellent quality free applications. Due to superior security built in, viruses simply cannot reproduce, even in theory, on normal Linux (and Mac) installations. Linux viruses simply do not exist in the wild as they are unable to propagate themselves without remote exploits, which are hard to come by in Linux systems. *That* is why there are no linux viruses outside the lab. Scumware/spyware can exist on Linux, if you are tricked into installing it. But nearly all spyware is written to run on MS Windows, because it's relatively easy to get windows to install it, often even without the user's knowledge (IE users are particularly vulnerable). I have removed links to those second rate Linux distributions that have sold their souls - i.e. signed a software patent deal with the Devil (Microsoft).
RPM
PBone search, rpmfind
and
rpmseek are sites where you can search
for, and download, RPM's (and Debian packages).
Links2Linux
has RPMs specifically for Suse Linux,
but try RPM PBone (above) first.
PHP is an open source programming language often used for server web
scripting. (eadon.com uses PHP, though
these days I would use Java or Python.).
You may need an editor. See PHPEdit
(Windows) or Quanta
(Linux), or - consider Eclipse
with the PHPeclipse
plug-in (Linux and Windows). Or buy a Zend IDE.
Perl
is a popular platform independent scripting
language. In addition to the perl site,
see the CPAN
site for free modules. Note, Python is superior to Perl for most tasks, see above.
You can download Sun's Java,
which allows Java programs to run on your
machine See my Java pages.
Web
Authoring Tools
Quanta
Plus runs on Linux (KDE desktop).
Quanta is a little rough here and there, for example the new WYSIWYG editing feature is slow and buggy on my system at time of my writing this (Aug 2006) so I stick to the "source editor" for most things. Quanta is improving, it is becoming impressive and user friendlier. I'm using Quanta to maintain this site.
On the other hand, the once-superb Dreamweaver was getting worse if DW MX was anything to go by so I abandoned DW. Incidentally DW MX (not MX 2004 at time of writing) can run on Linux via Crossover Office. A cross patform web editing tool
is NVU,
which is coming along. Finally, Mozilla
Firefox has a javascript debugger, a DOM inspector, and a magnificent extension, Web Developer which nicely complements HTML editors. For example Web Developer can validate any page open in firefox via the W3C html/css/links validators. Indispensible!
Microsoft Office documents are a hazard to your data, because those formats are closed. In effect your data is controlled by Microsoft and can you really trust MS? The Open Document Format (ODF) is the open and perfectly viable solution to this increasingly important issue. Every person and organisation should store its data in open formats subject to genuinely open standards.
"Linux
is free in terms of cost and in terms
of development because it's based on Open
Source software. We are free to adapt
the work of others for use in our schools.
This kind of freedom produces better software
and makes Linux the right choice for schools
and agencies concerned with the ethical
use of public funds."
Microsoft's
latest ugly DRM (Digital Rights Management)
plan to stop us choosing how we use our
computers. (They want to dictate whether
you are allowed to view and copy files etc.
on your own machine!). Update - Palladium DRM "technology" has ended up in Windows Vista. You have been warned!
As if spyware in patches was not enough,
if you want your Windows machine to be
secure, you must let microsoft have free
reign on your PC. (Moral: don't use Windows).