Where is Linux going?
This is a question a lot of forums hash over and argue about constantly.
Linux essentially started life as a DIY, ( Do It Yourself) kind of OS. Meaning mostly that, if you want to use it, you will play every role in using it. End user, technician, even quasi 'developer' (depending on how 'into it' you got.)
As distros have evolved though in the last two years or so, more focus has come onto the end user.
How much do distro developers really expect "Joe Desktop" to really know about using a Linux desktop?
Do we really want Linux adoption to extend to "Joe Desktop" who knows enough about using a computer to turn it on and surf the web, play some media and email or IM some buddies?
In response, some new distros have evolved and some existing distros have somewhat 're-directed' themselves to answer "Yes" to these questions.
In the 'proprietary' software world, there are 'levels' or categories of users types that exist.
There is the 'end user' who has more or less come to look at a computer as an appliance. Turn it on, push some buttons and 'do' whatever it is they expect it to 'do.
There is the 'power user' who likes to tweak, modify and customize their system. They take it upon themselves to learn as much as they can about the software and system in order to have it perform and look exactly the way they want it to.
Then there is the 'technical user' who is essentially the person who is trained and performs repair and configuration services to these computers.
Products and education are available from vendors, at a price, to technical users to be 'certified' and considered qualified and capable of repair and configurations.
As Linux distributions reach out to "Joe Desktop' or the 'end user', there is an expectation by the end user that it ( Linux) will perform similarly to those proprietary systems they have used.
The end user does not expect to have to learn 'technician' or 'power user' techniques in order to use the system.
This means they will seek out 'power users' and technicians to perform the same assistance and service as they do for their proprietary systems.
However. Most Linux communities are still 'set up' for the DIY mindset. If you peruse most distro and community forums, there is an expectation of existing users for 'newbies' to do some legwork and seek out answers on their own.
I'm not saying this is a negative on the behalf of the existing Linux community. They are simply doing what they have always done. doing it themselves. It promotes a feeling of empowerment and self sufficiency for them and believe any 'intelligent' person would want the same.
This type of interaction in the existing forums and communities is not what the 'Joe Desktops' of the world are looking for though.
Someone told Joe Desktop that Linux is just as capable as Windows or Apple in getting things done and that it is free. Those are two words just about anyone likes to hear, 'capable' and 'free'.
So now there is a rift in the Linux user world. Where distro developers have reached out to Joe Desktop and some Joe's are responding, the DIY community is practically offended that people content to rely on others to be service providers are among them.
So, Linux has reached out to Joe Desktop the end user, but where does Joe Desktop go for help and direction?
If Linux is trying to make itself accessible to Joe Desktop, trying to put itself in the same accessibility area that Joe Desktop is used to, then how can anyone blame Joe Desktop for being frustrated when he finds he is suddenly out of his element when it comes to support?
Joe says "Hey, you came knocking on my door remember. You wanted me to give you a try."
Joe is right. if you are going to make the software accessible to a user community that is not typically a DIY group of users, then those distros need to make available a new method of providing support to that category of user.
The DIY community is right also. Just because distro devs want to expand their reach into the public marketplace, shouldn't mean that suddenly DIY'ers have to change how they have always interacted and communicated either.
Perhaps something in the middle might work? establish a new forum or place for end users to find help. Ask those in you DIY community to help patrol that area and help Joe Desktops with their issues as one would expect on a help line. Only those who have the temperament to answer the same question repeatedly in a calm and personable manner need apply.
For those distros that are supported by a company, ie the Ubutus and OpenSuses and fedoras of the world that have a corporate sponsor behind them, perhaps they would pay a few people to answer a phone or man a forum or live chat sessions as well as have volunteers willing to help out.
Think about it, if you walk into someones house and say "Here, try this tool." and when he looks at it and says "Cool, OK. Ummm, how does it work?"
Do you really tell him to go figure it out on his own? Of course not. if you want him to try it and use it, you will help him get to know how to use it so he will want to keep using it.
Linux is emerging and as it emerges, it will need to find ways to make help accessible to those new users as well as making the software itself more accessible.
Saturday, May 30, 2009
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
Where does Linux fit in the business desktop?
I admit, I get inspired by reading other articles. Some are good, some leave a bit to be desired. Some just don't go far enough into the discussion.
First off, just what is the business desktop? Who uses it?
Who are the mystery 'power users' in a business environment that don't use the same tools to do their job that every one in the company uses?
While it's true that there are some jobs in a business that require the use of more 'specialized' software that not everyone else will use. For example, the marketing/PR dept will make use of graphics and video software that not many others will need. R&D will make use of CAD software not many others will need. Accounting might use software not everyone else will use. You get the idea.
Many, if not most, of the users in business need access to 'typical' productivity applications. Word processors, spreadsheets, database front ends or just quick and dirty databases for smaller needs. Web access, perhaps multi-media apps, PDF viewers, instant messaging, email, calendars and scheduling apps.
The difference is the applications, not the OS.
So what's the big deal about the OS? Well, the OS is only as good as the apps written to run on it, many will tell you.
That is a yes and no kind of statement in my thinking. On one hand, you want an OS that is secure and streamlined. Accessible and available to hardware. Aha, that is a big one, hardware.
While many people read the headline articles and forum posts about a Linux distro having trouble with a given piece of hardware, the truth of it is, more often than not, Linux has more accessibility to hardware than most other OS's. Only the newest, latest,greatest stuff that doesn't already come with Linux drivers will have to wait until some interested coder puts one together for it.
Just what hardware does the typical business use in it's offices and production areas? The latest, greatest? Not usually. Yes, the bigger enterprise level corporations with tremendous budgets will buy brand new computers in volume.
interestingly enough, according to an SBA report updated in Sept, 2008, small business makes up 99.7% of all employers in the U.S.
Yes, 99.7%. That is not a misprint. Even so, most marketing and pricing is targeted to enterprise and 'big' business.
Small businesses are using what they have available. They are watching costs closer than perhaps anyone else in the business world. They might buy computers new, but they keep hardware longer and are more likely to maintain the status quo in order to just keep things cost effective and lower in general.
However, small business are also more likely and able to re purpose older hardware. Sure, while a warranty on a computer is in effect, it makes the most sense to keep what is on there as is. once that warranty is up though, it becomes a liability. In which case you are making the best of the situation as is. Small businesses can't always afford to just hop out there and buy new computers every three years.
So Where does Linux come in? When it's time to move on. When your windows is about to fall out of support from MS and they are telling you you must buy the next version, think of Linux.
Linux is absolutely terrific for clerical workers, production shop computers and any others that simply need connectivity to the network for Internet access, email, printing reports and orders, etc...
Most likely, it will do just fine on the top brass computers as well. It's not too often the CEO, CIO or vice presidents 'need' specialized niche software. Most of it is already web based anyway. As more applications are developed to be presented as web based and accessed by browsers, it makes Linux even more appealing to more categories of users in the business.
Linux servers in business is no secret. They are reliable, secure, cost less to maintain. Also, there is an ever growing pool of server distributed, web based applications available for Linux to make day to day user apps available using a web browser, which makes whatever OS the end user has installed negligible.
In fact, there are a lot of businesses that rely on chain stores to distribute goods and services that rely on AS400 and distributed access to centralized servers already. All the chain store location computers are doing are logging into the main servers at the company's main offices and acting as thin clients. Linux is an ace in that market.
As a matter of fact, Linux terminal servers are well known for their uptime and accessibility. Also, Linux is also well known for working out ways to work with and communicate with other systems. so you can have an AS400 client on a Linux desktop as easily as you can on a Windows desktop.
Improved TCO in hardware comes again in new hardware as Linux ibecomes more available on pre-installed systems.
Some 'big name' vendors are carrying more and more pre-installed Linux options like HP, Lenovo and Dell. As the appeal for low cost and open source increases, small businesses will be able to bring in Linux machines with warranties on new hardware.
So, what's the overall advice of this post to small businesses in regard to adopting Linux?
1) Re-purpose hardware that is due for upgrading to a new version of OS. Instead of paying for a new license, install Linux instead and decrease your TCO on your hardware. Use the re purposed computer for personnel who don't need specialized niche software that only runs on proprietary OS's. After investigating the options available in Linux, I would bet you find there aren't that many users in your office that can't use an OpenSource alternative for a lot of those 'specialized' apps.
2) Be aware of the new hardware offerings from recognized brand vendors. Not only will you get the lower cost ( in some cases) related to using Linux as an OS, but you get new hardware with the warranties just as with any other OS you might pay for.
3) "Try before you buy". You can research all the software available to Linux and alternatives to Windows or Apple applications for free, on your own time before you pay for anything in terms of new hardware or otherwise. Also, test various installs and 'distros' of Linux on the computers you have in your business already. if you have one machine that isn't doing anything, use it for a test bed to see which distro works best on the hardware ( if it's exemplary of the rest of the machines in your business) and to see which distro looks and performs most to your business interests and needs.
4) Start small. take it one machine at a time. Don't overwhelm your staff with immediate and drastic changes. Change out a few machines for Linux machines and follow those users to get input and try various apps that might work better for them and the needs of the tasks they are doing.
There is no pint in trying to convince businesses and other users to switch to Linux wholesale if they have paid money for a system. if it is still viable in terms of support and the license is still valid, use it, don't ditch something just for the sake of change. That's just throwing money away.
Wait till the cost of replacing has been removed. When the license needs to be renewed or there is no choice but to pay for a software upgrade. That's when you consider bringing another software system in.Anyone in business can appreciate good value. Extending the life of a machine or many machines they paid good money for only makes sense. Especially if they can do it with software that is lower in cost ( if not outright free) than what was previously installed.
Linux is good for business if brought in properly.
First off, just what is the business desktop? Who uses it?
Who are the mystery 'power users' in a business environment that don't use the same tools to do their job that every one in the company uses?
While it's true that there are some jobs in a business that require the use of more 'specialized' software that not everyone else will use. For example, the marketing/PR dept will make use of graphics and video software that not many others will need. R&D will make use of CAD software not many others will need. Accounting might use software not everyone else will use. You get the idea.
Many, if not most, of the users in business need access to 'typical' productivity applications. Word processors, spreadsheets, database front ends or just quick and dirty databases for smaller needs. Web access, perhaps multi-media apps, PDF viewers, instant messaging, email, calendars and scheduling apps.
The difference is the applications, not the OS.
So what's the big deal about the OS? Well, the OS is only as good as the apps written to run on it, many will tell you.
That is a yes and no kind of statement in my thinking. On one hand, you want an OS that is secure and streamlined. Accessible and available to hardware. Aha, that is a big one, hardware.
While many people read the headline articles and forum posts about a Linux distro having trouble with a given piece of hardware, the truth of it is, more often than not, Linux has more accessibility to hardware than most other OS's. Only the newest, latest,greatest stuff that doesn't already come with Linux drivers will have to wait until some interested coder puts one together for it.
Just what hardware does the typical business use in it's offices and production areas? The latest, greatest? Not usually. Yes, the bigger enterprise level corporations with tremendous budgets will buy brand new computers in volume.
interestingly enough, according to an SBA report updated in Sept, 2008, small business makes up 99.7% of all employers in the U.S.
Yes, 99.7%. That is not a misprint. Even so, most marketing and pricing is targeted to enterprise and 'big' business.
Small businesses are using what they have available. They are watching costs closer than perhaps anyone else in the business world. They might buy computers new, but they keep hardware longer and are more likely to maintain the status quo in order to just keep things cost effective and lower in general.
However, small business are also more likely and able to re purpose older hardware. Sure, while a warranty on a computer is in effect, it makes the most sense to keep what is on there as is. once that warranty is up though, it becomes a liability. In which case you are making the best of the situation as is. Small businesses can't always afford to just hop out there and buy new computers every three years.
So Where does Linux come in? When it's time to move on. When your windows is about to fall out of support from MS and they are telling you you must buy the next version, think of Linux.
Linux is absolutely terrific for clerical workers, production shop computers and any others that simply need connectivity to the network for Internet access, email, printing reports and orders, etc...
Most likely, it will do just fine on the top brass computers as well. It's not too often the CEO, CIO or vice presidents 'need' specialized niche software. Most of it is already web based anyway. As more applications are developed to be presented as web based and accessed by browsers, it makes Linux even more appealing to more categories of users in the business.
Linux servers in business is no secret. They are reliable, secure, cost less to maintain. Also, there is an ever growing pool of server distributed, web based applications available for Linux to make day to day user apps available using a web browser, which makes whatever OS the end user has installed negligible.
In fact, there are a lot of businesses that rely on chain stores to distribute goods and services that rely on AS400 and distributed access to centralized servers already. All the chain store location computers are doing are logging into the main servers at the company's main offices and acting as thin clients. Linux is an ace in that market.
As a matter of fact, Linux terminal servers are well known for their uptime and accessibility. Also, Linux is also well known for working out ways to work with and communicate with other systems. so you can have an AS400 client on a Linux desktop as easily as you can on a Windows desktop.
Improved TCO in hardware comes again in new hardware as Linux ibecomes more available on pre-installed systems.
Some 'big name' vendors are carrying more and more pre-installed Linux options like HP, Lenovo and Dell. As the appeal for low cost and open source increases, small businesses will be able to bring in Linux machines with warranties on new hardware.
So, what's the overall advice of this post to small businesses in regard to adopting Linux?
1) Re-purpose hardware that is due for upgrading to a new version of OS. Instead of paying for a new license, install Linux instead and decrease your TCO on your hardware. Use the re purposed computer for personnel who don't need specialized niche software that only runs on proprietary OS's. After investigating the options available in Linux, I would bet you find there aren't that many users in your office that can't use an OpenSource alternative for a lot of those 'specialized' apps.
2) Be aware of the new hardware offerings from recognized brand vendors. Not only will you get the lower cost ( in some cases) related to using Linux as an OS, but you get new hardware with the warranties just as with any other OS you might pay for.
3) "Try before you buy". You can research all the software available to Linux and alternatives to Windows or Apple applications for free, on your own time before you pay for anything in terms of new hardware or otherwise. Also, test various installs and 'distros' of Linux on the computers you have in your business already. if you have one machine that isn't doing anything, use it for a test bed to see which distro works best on the hardware ( if it's exemplary of the rest of the machines in your business) and to see which distro looks and performs most to your business interests and needs.
4) Start small. take it one machine at a time. Don't overwhelm your staff with immediate and drastic changes. Change out a few machines for Linux machines and follow those users to get input and try various apps that might work better for them and the needs of the tasks they are doing.
There is no pint in trying to convince businesses and other users to switch to Linux wholesale if they have paid money for a system. if it is still viable in terms of support and the license is still valid, use it, don't ditch something just for the sake of change. That's just throwing money away.
Wait till the cost of replacing has been removed. When the license needs to be renewed or there is no choice but to pay for a software upgrade. That's when you consider bringing another software system in.Anyone in business can appreciate good value. Extending the life of a machine or many machines they paid good money for only makes sense. Especially if they can do it with software that is lower in cost ( if not outright free) than what was previously installed.
Linux is good for business if brought in properly.
Friday, May 22, 2009
The "Big Boys" don't innovate anymore
The real innovation comes from small businesses and projects trying to meet a need and make a name for themselves.
They are unencumbered by massive PR and marketing departments trying to throw in everything but the stuff that is needed in order to appease some marketing survey.
Microsoft has been using the technique for decades now. See a hot technology, buy it up and take it over. IBM, RedHat, Oracle, Sun and Novell have been playing the game too.
They don't create anything anymore. They refine it and mass produce it. Then they let the PR and marketing people in and ruin a good thing. (Except for Novell, they can't seem to hire marketing people at all, because thankfully, they can put out a solid product, they just never actually sell the darn thing.)
Cannonical is innovating in that it is sort of trying to innovate. Sure, they are using concepts that already exist and then try to refit them to work with their primary product (Ubuntu, for the unaware.) but hey, at least they aren't just sittting around doing nothing.
Novell needs to quit being it's own OS/distro and focus on innovating and developing tools. When they do just that, they usually hit a home run. Let someone else market it for them. Maybe Cannonical can do the marketing for Novell, they have shown they can market successfully.
OpenSource especially needs some innovation now.
Wouldn't it be nice if IBM or someone asembled a crack team of coders and let them loose on their own. Give them a list of "top ten type of apps that would really be good to have in OpenSOurce" and let them go. No one else talks to them except in providing information they ask for in terms of research.
We need you "little guys' to keep innovating so we can keep improving the base for sofware in the future.
They are unencumbered by massive PR and marketing departments trying to throw in everything but the stuff that is needed in order to appease some marketing survey.
Microsoft has been using the technique for decades now. See a hot technology, buy it up and take it over. IBM, RedHat, Oracle, Sun and Novell have been playing the game too.
They don't create anything anymore. They refine it and mass produce it. Then they let the PR and marketing people in and ruin a good thing. (Except for Novell, they can't seem to hire marketing people at all, because thankfully, they can put out a solid product, they just never actually sell the darn thing.)
Cannonical is innovating in that it is sort of trying to innovate. Sure, they are using concepts that already exist and then try to refit them to work with their primary product (Ubuntu, for the unaware.) but hey, at least they aren't just sittting around doing nothing.
Novell needs to quit being it's own OS/distro and focus on innovating and developing tools. When they do just that, they usually hit a home run. Let someone else market it for them. Maybe Cannonical can do the marketing for Novell, they have shown they can market successfully.
OpenSource especially needs some innovation now.
Wouldn't it be nice if IBM or someone asembled a crack team of coders and let them loose on their own. Give them a list of "top ten type of apps that would really be good to have in OpenSOurce" and let them go. No one else talks to them except in providing information they ask for in terms of research.
We need you "little guys' to keep innovating so we can keep improving the base for sofware in the future.
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
the cost comparison shopper
It's well known that around here, to compare Windows to Linux is viewed with amusement and may even get you a shake of the head, as if to say "you still don't get it, do you?"
First of all, most people get way to carried away with the Linux vs Windows debate anyway. Let's take a little break and get back a fresh sense of perspective people. It's a computer OS. It's not the end of the world or even the end of computing.
Point one, use what you want to use. If you like windows, then by golly, use Windows. No one else really cares what you use. Same for Linux. If you prefer to use a variation of Linux, so be it. Leave everyone else alone.
Point two, if you simply must enter a discussion on which OS to choose, throw out the common and mostly useless arguments and pull out your list of "what do I do and need to do on a computer". Using an OS really is more about software than anything else. The OS itself is really just a platform for the hardware to talk to the software to talk to the user.. It's a middleman or a translator really.
If you base your discussion on usability instead of "this OS has windows pop up in pretty blue colors and that one is brown ", then you will go a lot further in making an informed and workable choice.
But hey, for a bit of fun and a little discussion, let's comparison shop. I like to comparison shop, it usually saves me money. Sometimes it doesn't. That's because sometimes, you get what you pay for. That means, There have been times I walk into a store, find a product X that says it does the same job as Product G but when you get home, you realize the reason Product X was 50% or more cheaper is because they don't have the same quality or performance as the 'other' product that costs more. It's just cheap.
Now, if I go to the store to comparison shop for say, laundry detergent. I can buy Brand J which cleans the clothes and has a pretty scent and a nifty formed handle on top to carry around.
OR, I can buy Brand P, which has a pretty scent, cleans the clothes and doesn't have a formed handle, but a cardboard or plastic simple handle to carry it around instead.
What I need to do is get the clothes clean. Both brands do that, both brands add nice scent to the product. The packaging is what is different. Brand J has a formed custom package that is mostly for ultra easy holding and pretty much eye candy. Product P just has a cardboard box with a simple handle.
Product P is 50% the cost of Product J. I will take Product P becasue I know how to manage a simple handle and I don't give a rats patoot about eye candy.
If Product P didn't clean the clothes as well as Product J, then I won't be buying it again.
This is pretty much what Linux vs whatever OS's boils down to, packaging.
Linux pretty much has software available to do the things we want to do on a computer as other OS's have software available for.
Linux software often has different, sometimes more 'plain', packaging and presentation to it.
Also, we need to realizze that in the Linux world, the same as in the other OS worlds, there is more than one choice of application to do a task.
There is more than one web browser, more than one music player, more than one GUI, more than one email app, the list goes on and on. No one is 'stuck' with the defaults a given Linux distro provides. There are other choices, exactly as in other OS frameworks.
Experiment, find one that you like and use it.
That goes for software and OS's alike.
Too many times, people get caught up in the frivolous issues that amount to arguing over eye candy and personal preference or conditioning.
Now, if you say that Linux is too hard to use, well, I know of pre-school children that can work their way around Linux just fine. So if you aren't as capable as a five year old, that's maybe not something you want to admit in public.
First of all, most people get way to carried away with the Linux vs Windows debate anyway. Let's take a little break and get back a fresh sense of perspective people. It's a computer OS. It's not the end of the world or even the end of computing.
Point one, use what you want to use. If you like windows, then by golly, use Windows. No one else really cares what you use. Same for Linux. If you prefer to use a variation of Linux, so be it. Leave everyone else alone.
Point two, if you simply must enter a discussion on which OS to choose, throw out the common and mostly useless arguments and pull out your list of "what do I do and need to do on a computer". Using an OS really is more about software than anything else. The OS itself is really just a platform for the hardware to talk to the software to talk to the user.. It's a middleman or a translator really.
If you base your discussion on usability instead of "this OS has windows pop up in pretty blue colors and that one is brown ", then you will go a lot further in making an informed and workable choice.
But hey, for a bit of fun and a little discussion, let's comparison shop. I like to comparison shop, it usually saves me money. Sometimes it doesn't. That's because sometimes, you get what you pay for. That means, There have been times I walk into a store, find a product X that says it does the same job as Product G but when you get home, you realize the reason Product X was 50% or more cheaper is because they don't have the same quality or performance as the 'other' product that costs more. It's just cheap.
Now, if I go to the store to comparison shop for say, laundry detergent. I can buy Brand J which cleans the clothes and has a pretty scent and a nifty formed handle on top to carry around.
OR, I can buy Brand P, which has a pretty scent, cleans the clothes and doesn't have a formed handle, but a cardboard or plastic simple handle to carry it around instead.
What I need to do is get the clothes clean. Both brands do that, both brands add nice scent to the product. The packaging is what is different. Brand J has a formed custom package that is mostly for ultra easy holding and pretty much eye candy. Product P just has a cardboard box with a simple handle.
Product P is 50% the cost of Product J. I will take Product P becasue I know how to manage a simple handle and I don't give a rats patoot about eye candy.
If Product P didn't clean the clothes as well as Product J, then I won't be buying it again.
This is pretty much what Linux vs whatever OS's boils down to, packaging.
Linux pretty much has software available to do the things we want to do on a computer as other OS's have software available for.
Linux software often has different, sometimes more 'plain', packaging and presentation to it.
Also, we need to realizze that in the Linux world, the same as in the other OS worlds, there is more than one choice of application to do a task.
There is more than one web browser, more than one music player, more than one GUI, more than one email app, the list goes on and on. No one is 'stuck' with the defaults a given Linux distro provides. There are other choices, exactly as in other OS frameworks.
Experiment, find one that you like and use it.
That goes for software and OS's alike.
Too many times, people get caught up in the frivolous issues that amount to arguing over eye candy and personal preference or conditioning.
Now, if you say that Linux is too hard to use, well, I know of pre-school children that can work their way around Linux just fine. So if you aren't as capable as a five year old, that's maybe not something you want to admit in public.
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
An OpenSource business for OpenSource funding
In numerous posts, blogs, articles and forum threads on the web, we hear about the need for OpenSource projects to get money to them in a consistent and constant manner.
We also hear about the need to provide a single source provider of responsibility and financial 'backing" of OpenSource software projects.
This is a two sided approach to answer two issues with one business. It could be two separate businesses, but one could do it easily enough.
This company could call itself anything it wants, but for the sake of discussion, let's call it "OpenSupport Services", or "OS" for short.
I am willing to bet, most people have heard of businesses that get money from one person to another. businesses like Western Union, even PayPal does this in it's own way.
You want to send money to person or company B. The transfer company takes a small percentage for the transaction and adds it to the total or subtracts the expense from the total.
OS will be able to do this. On it's very handy website, people can use a variety of methods to make a payment and select from a list of pre-arranged OpenSource Projects that accept donations.
Why, you can even create a "MyProjects" group of regular recipients that the payment is divided evenly among for ease of future donations.
OS then sends the accepted payment from the members/subscribers for a small percentage to either be added to the total, or subtracted from the total. Can't stay in business if you don't make money.
The list OS offers individuals wishing to make payments is based on OpenSource Projects who register with OS and provide a person who is accountable for receiving said payments and reporting to OS that the project is still in good standing and is active to receive payments.
What the project does with the money is up to them. All OS is doing is handling the collection and distributing of the money from a central source.
Phase two of OS's offerings is in centralized financial backing of OpenSource Projects. For example. By creatively working with an insuring and bonding agent, OS is able to provide A financial 'support' layer for projects that meet acceptable standards for productivity. Then, when Joe user decides to download say, Linux distro A, they can register their "product" with OS and purchase a sort of OpenSOurce warranty.
As long as Linux Distro A is registered and in good standing with OS standards, if Joe User were to have some horrible mishap where there computer is damaged in some way by the OpenSource software in question, they are eligible to receive compensation for the computer/data loss that resulted.
Think of how great it would be to know you can install and use great OpenSource Linux distros like CentOS or Debian that have no corporate backing so to speak and still get the same option of a warranty and support as you would from 'another' vendor or software provider.
This can give OpenSource users peace of mind that if hardware or data loss problems arise due to use of OpenSource software, just like with a proprietary provider, they can get a 'warranty' to protect their assets.
It isn't uncommon at all for consumers to purchase third party warranties. They do it all the time when they buy consumer electronics or appliances or even tools and hardware.
If this company called OS can be creative and market these services well, it can not only make a tidy profit, but assist OpenSource projects to grow and mature as funding allows more time and resources to be spent on the projects.
Also, the peace of mind that consumers and users will get from knowing they won't be left treading water from faulty software, will make OpenSource software adoption an easier choice for them to make, especially in the small business and home usage markets.
OpenSource doesn't have to be just for philanthropists and volunteers, it can have a viable and profitable base and still make information available for everyone.
We also hear about the need to provide a single source provider of responsibility and financial 'backing" of OpenSource software projects.
This is a two sided approach to answer two issues with one business. It could be two separate businesses, but one could do it easily enough.
This company could call itself anything it wants, but for the sake of discussion, let's call it "OpenSupport Services", or "OS" for short.
I am willing to bet, most people have heard of businesses that get money from one person to another. businesses like Western Union, even PayPal does this in it's own way.
You want to send money to person or company B. The transfer company takes a small percentage for the transaction and adds it to the total or subtracts the expense from the total.
OS will be able to do this. On it's very handy website, people can use a variety of methods to make a payment and select from a list of pre-arranged OpenSource Projects that accept donations.
Why, you can even create a "MyProjects" group of regular recipients that the payment is divided evenly among for ease of future donations.
OS then sends the accepted payment from the members/subscribers for a small percentage to either be added to the total, or subtracted from the total. Can't stay in business if you don't make money.
The list OS offers individuals wishing to make payments is based on OpenSource Projects who register with OS and provide a person who is accountable for receiving said payments and reporting to OS that the project is still in good standing and is active to receive payments.
What the project does with the money is up to them. All OS is doing is handling the collection and distributing of the money from a central source.
Phase two of OS's offerings is in centralized financial backing of OpenSource Projects. For example. By creatively working with an insuring and bonding agent, OS is able to provide A financial 'support' layer for projects that meet acceptable standards for productivity. Then, when Joe user decides to download say, Linux distro A, they can register their "product" with OS and purchase a sort of OpenSOurce warranty.
As long as Linux Distro A is registered and in good standing with OS standards, if Joe User were to have some horrible mishap where there computer is damaged in some way by the OpenSource software in question, they are eligible to receive compensation for the computer/data loss that resulted.
Think of how great it would be to know you can install and use great OpenSource Linux distros like CentOS or Debian that have no corporate backing so to speak and still get the same option of a warranty and support as you would from 'another' vendor or software provider.
This can give OpenSource users peace of mind that if hardware or data loss problems arise due to use of OpenSource software, just like with a proprietary provider, they can get a 'warranty' to protect their assets.
It isn't uncommon at all for consumers to purchase third party warranties. They do it all the time when they buy consumer electronics or appliances or even tools and hardware.
If this company called OS can be creative and market these services well, it can not only make a tidy profit, but assist OpenSource projects to grow and mature as funding allows more time and resources to be spent on the projects.
Also, the peace of mind that consumers and users will get from knowing they won't be left treading water from faulty software, will make OpenSource software adoption an easier choice for them to make, especially in the small business and home usage markets.
OpenSource doesn't have to be just for philanthropists and volunteers, it can have a viable and profitable base and still make information available for everyone.
Friday, May 8, 2009
"Dogpiling" on the OpenSource Community
Matt Assay recently posted an article that casts a somewhat negative view on the 'OpenSource" community at large.
What most commenters and writers of response articles are taking from it is that Matt and those who think like him consider the largest portion of users and 'members' of a given 'community to be 'freeloaders".
Here at PBP, we ( I say "we" because, believe it or don't, there is more than one person working on some of these articles ) believe that many people labor under the wrong impression of what "Open" as in "OpenSource" is all about. Especially in regard to communities that build around OpenSource software.
If anyone honestly believes that by opening a forum or wiki, blog, etc.. that allows people to join and 'contribute' in the hopes that numerous talented and excited programmers, testers, and other experienced persons will dive right in and make that "community' an OpenSource powerhouse, they are mistaken.
Building an 'OpenSource' community should be looked at as similar to mining. You will find a lot of people who will download and use the software, etc and not produce any real response in the form of contributed code or testing results, etc...
What you will find is maybe one out of 50 users who are even capable of writing code. Why is it just assumed that all people who might use OpenSource software are just going to know that kind of stuff anyway? Are people still so in the dark as to think only IT pros are using Linux anymore? Read the forums at ANY Linux distro and you will discover that the vast majority of posters have no coding or technical skills really. They are simply people who want to use a computer.
Not only are they not going to provide code or specific testing results, they most likely won't post a word unless they find something not working. In this regard, silence gives consent. We hope.
They just want to write a report, or listen to music or watch a movie, etc.. They want to use the software, not help design it.
Those 'users' can still be useful though. As one commenter said in the Matt Assay article, if nothing else, they can be used as a gauge to how often the software is being downloaded, the few user related comments can give an idea, a direction on how it is being used.
When the honest-to-goodness coder or aspiring coder pops in and decides to offer something, you should look on that as a positive. Your software has been found interesting and useful enough to incite someone to want to help improve it. Take that contribution and run with it. If it is indeed useful and does indeed make things better.
Like I said, it's like mining or panning for gold. You will more often than not get a lot of silt and dust and other non gold or diamond gems. However, the experienced treasure hunter learns to use those things to help them find out if they are in the right area to begin with.
All of the users are useful if they are viewed properly.
What most commenters and writers of response articles are taking from it is that Matt and those who think like him consider the largest portion of users and 'members' of a given 'community to be 'freeloaders".
Here at PBP, we ( I say "we" because, believe it or don't, there is more than one person working on some of these articles ) believe that many people labor under the wrong impression of what "Open" as in "OpenSource" is all about. Especially in regard to communities that build around OpenSource software.
If anyone honestly believes that by opening a forum or wiki, blog, etc.. that allows people to join and 'contribute' in the hopes that numerous talented and excited programmers, testers, and other experienced persons will dive right in and make that "community' an OpenSource powerhouse, they are mistaken.
Building an 'OpenSource' community should be looked at as similar to mining. You will find a lot of people who will download and use the software, etc and not produce any real response in the form of contributed code or testing results, etc...
What you will find is maybe one out of 50 users who are even capable of writing code. Why is it just assumed that all people who might use OpenSource software are just going to know that kind of stuff anyway? Are people still so in the dark as to think only IT pros are using Linux anymore? Read the forums at ANY Linux distro and you will discover that the vast majority of posters have no coding or technical skills really. They are simply people who want to use a computer.
Not only are they not going to provide code or specific testing results, they most likely won't post a word unless they find something not working. In this regard, silence gives consent. We hope.
They just want to write a report, or listen to music or watch a movie, etc.. They want to use the software, not help design it.
Those 'users' can still be useful though. As one commenter said in the Matt Assay article, if nothing else, they can be used as a gauge to how often the software is being downloaded, the few user related comments can give an idea, a direction on how it is being used.
When the honest-to-goodness coder or aspiring coder pops in and decides to offer something, you should look on that as a positive. Your software has been found interesting and useful enough to incite someone to want to help improve it. Take that contribution and run with it. If it is indeed useful and does indeed make things better.
Like I said, it's like mining or panning for gold. You will more often than not get a lot of silt and dust and other non gold or diamond gems. However, the experienced treasure hunter learns to use those things to help them find out if they are in the right area to begin with.
All of the users are useful if they are viewed properly.
Friday, May 1, 2009
An interview with a 'normal' Linux user
We thought we would take the opportunity to start a series of interviews with people who just use Linux in their everyday lives. These are not people who are distro developers or kernel builders or Linux evangelists. Average, everyday people who have decided to implement a Linux system or two into their everyday lives.
Some use Linux at home, some at work. For business, pleasure and just getting things done.
Our first interview is with a guy who uses Linux on his home computer. His name is, get ready for this now, "Dude". ( I'm not kidding, that's his name).
PBP: Hey Dude, thanks for taking some time to answer a few questions.
D: Oh hey, no problem dude. I have a little bit while I wait for my girlfriend to get back home.
PBP: Ok, so tell us a little bit about yourself. Your name, where you work and how did you fit Linux into your computing world.
D: Uh, my name is Dude, dude. you already said it. Anyway, I am a self employed artist and I have a computer at home that my uncle gave me for my birthday a couple years ago. I installed Linux on that.
PBP: What kind of art do you do?
D: I do all kinds of artful things. I paint, mostly. I like to use all kinds of things like canvas and burlap, sometimes just clean white paper. It all depends. And then I like to use watercolors, oil based paints, whatever produces the look I want to give it.
PBP: Did the computer you received have Linux installed on it when you got it?
D: Oh no way dude. It had Windows on it. It still does, but I don't use it that much anymore really. Mostly just to watch Netflix movies online. They're kinda picky about that you know.
PBP: So did you install Linux on your computer, are you a computer hobbyist as well?
D: Oh not me dude. No way, I just like to get on, do my computer thing and get back to doing my thing. like painting. No, my girlfriend installed it for me. She knows all kinds of cool stuff like that dude.
PBP: Your girlfriend installed it for you. Which distribution did she install on it for you then?
D: Uhhh, dude, you know, I'm not really sure. Lavender knows more about that stuff than I do.
PBP: well, do the words Ubuntu or Fedora or Suse sound familiar to you?
D: OH, I got it. It's called "Ubuntu" yeah, that's it dude. It's pretty cool, it does all the things I want to do anyway, except play Netflix videos.
PBP: How long have you been using Linux on that computer?
D: Geez, you ask hard questions dude. I don't know, I guess Lavender did it a couple months after I got it.
PBP: So you've been using Linux for about two years then? I guess you must like it if it's still on your computer.
D: Not quite two years dude, more like maybe a year and a half. I think it's fine. All I really use it for is to put pictures I take of my artful things with this digital camera Lavender has. That way I can put them online. Well, Lavender puts them online. I play music on it and check email. Stuff like that. Like I said dude, Lavender uses it a lot more than I do.
PBP: So, would you say Linux is harder to use than Windows, the same, or easier to use?
D: I guess it's about the same to me really dude. I mean, its not like it's rocket science. You just like, click on a button and look for whatever it is you want to do. Pretty much the same in both of them as far as I can tell. Although, I can say Lavender doesn't get as harshed about things like viruses and stuff like that. She told me I'm only supposed to use the web and email and any online kind of stuff on the Linux part.
PBP: Thank you for taking a few minutes to talk about Linux with me Dude, I hope your artwork goes well.
D: Oh dude, thanks a lot. This was kind of fun and it killed some time and I would have been like bored and whatever just sitting here waiting, so no problem.
End Note:
Well, it seems that this guy isn't really a computer fan one way or the other. But at least he found that Linux wasn't any more difficult to use than Windows. Which I think is a good thing.
Stay tuned for our next interview. Hopefully someone in the business world.
Some use Linux at home, some at work. For business, pleasure and just getting things done.
Our first interview is with a guy who uses Linux on his home computer. His name is, get ready for this now, "Dude". ( I'm not kidding, that's his name).
PBP: Hey Dude, thanks for taking some time to answer a few questions.
D: Oh hey, no problem dude. I have a little bit while I wait for my girlfriend to get back home.
PBP: Ok, so tell us a little bit about yourself. Your name, where you work and how did you fit Linux into your computing world.
D: Uh, my name is Dude, dude. you already said it. Anyway, I am a self employed artist and I have a computer at home that my uncle gave me for my birthday a couple years ago. I installed Linux on that.
PBP: What kind of art do you do?
D: I do all kinds of artful things. I paint, mostly. I like to use all kinds of things like canvas and burlap, sometimes just clean white paper. It all depends. And then I like to use watercolors, oil based paints, whatever produces the look I want to give it.
PBP: Did the computer you received have Linux installed on it when you got it?
D: Oh no way dude. It had Windows on it. It still does, but I don't use it that much anymore really. Mostly just to watch Netflix movies online. They're kinda picky about that you know.
PBP: So did you install Linux on your computer, are you a computer hobbyist as well?
D: Oh not me dude. No way, I just like to get on, do my computer thing and get back to doing my thing. like painting. No, my girlfriend installed it for me. She knows all kinds of cool stuff like that dude.
PBP: Your girlfriend installed it for you. Which distribution did she install on it for you then?
D: Uhhh, dude, you know, I'm not really sure. Lavender knows more about that stuff than I do.
PBP: well, do the words Ubuntu or Fedora or Suse sound familiar to you?
D: OH, I got it. It's called "Ubuntu" yeah, that's it dude. It's pretty cool, it does all the things I want to do anyway, except play Netflix videos.
PBP: How long have you been using Linux on that computer?
D: Geez, you ask hard questions dude. I don't know, I guess Lavender did it a couple months after I got it.
PBP: So you've been using Linux for about two years then? I guess you must like it if it's still on your computer.
D: Not quite two years dude, more like maybe a year and a half. I think it's fine. All I really use it for is to put pictures I take of my artful things with this digital camera Lavender has. That way I can put them online. Well, Lavender puts them online. I play music on it and check email. Stuff like that. Like I said dude, Lavender uses it a lot more than I do.
PBP: So, would you say Linux is harder to use than Windows, the same, or easier to use?
D: I guess it's about the same to me really dude. I mean, its not like it's rocket science. You just like, click on a button and look for whatever it is you want to do. Pretty much the same in both of them as far as I can tell. Although, I can say Lavender doesn't get as harshed about things like viruses and stuff like that. She told me I'm only supposed to use the web and email and any online kind of stuff on the Linux part.
PBP: Thank you for taking a few minutes to talk about Linux with me Dude, I hope your artwork goes well.
D: Oh dude, thanks a lot. This was kind of fun and it killed some time and I would have been like bored and whatever just sitting here waiting, so no problem.
End Note:
Well, it seems that this guy isn't really a computer fan one way or the other. But at least he found that Linux wasn't any more difficult to use than Windows. Which I think is a good thing.
Stay tuned for our next interview. Hopefully someone in the business world.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
