Free software costs — who really cares?

Over the past few years, various research groups have been coming
out with studies showing that the total cost of ownership (TCO) for
GNU/Linux is higher than that for Windows. Naturally, many in the free
software community put forth their own arguments — some of them ad
hominem — disputing those studies. In my “humble” opinion, they got
baited into Microsoft’s game, the one where Microsoft sets the rules.
Same thing happened regarding an entry in an MSDN blog, “How can I trust Firefox?” The rules in free software are different, remember?

Free software is a matter of the users’ freedom to run, copy,
distribute, study, change and improve the software. More precisely, it
refers to four kinds of freedom for the users of the software:

The freedom to run the program, for any purpose (freedom 0).
The freedom to study how the program works, and adapt it to your
needs (freedom 1). Access to the source code is a precondition for this.
The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor (freedom 2).
The freedom to improve the program, and release your improvements
to the public, so that the whole community benefits (freedom 3). Access
to the source code is a precondition for this.

A program is free software if users have all of these freedoms.

As an aside, there’s a different set of rules in the “Can I trust
Firefox” issue, but some of the reponses on the blog address those
rules. I might create an entry on that some other time.

(more…)

Article in Free Software Magazine

An article I wrote for Free Software Magazine is now available online. You can read it here.

Just
a word on “free software”. Many people, including, sadly, many in the
free software camp, forget about the “free speech” part of free
software. Free software, as defined by the Free Software Foundation (FSF), “refers to four kinds of freedom, for the users of the software:

• The freedom to run the program, for any purpose (freedom 0).
• The freedom to study how the program works, and adapt it to your needs
  (freedom 1). Access to the source code is a precondition for this.
• The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor (freedom
  2).
• The freedom to improve the program, and release your improvements to the
  public, so that the whole community benefits (freedom 3). Access to the source
  code is a precondition for this.

A program is free software if users have all of these freedoms.”

BTW, going back to the article — there’s a link to leave comments
on the article, but it takes you to a page which says that comments are
no longer allowed. I wouldn’t mind comments on this site though 8:)

m|ph TV

Just a few comments on the show:

I just confirmed from Adel that he and Jayvee don’t wear make-up during
the shoot. It shows, guys. Doesn’t have to be anything elaborate, just
foundation might do.

The hosts walking in the dark didn’t work, sorry. It was a bold move though.

There’s a segment where someone’s put down the laptop on the bed. Ordinarily,
that’s a no-no-no, because the cloth could block the vents and cause
the laptop to heat up more than it normally would. I say ‘ordinarily’
because there are laptop mini-tables that fit right under the laptop
and keep the circulation going. Maybe the laptop-on-the-bed in question
did have such a device, but I thought that that should’ve been clear.

Lastly, what happened to the last two Saturdays, where were you guys?

Those of you who are reading this from my site may be wondering what
I’m talking about. It’s m|ph TV, an offshoot of Mobile Philippines
magazine. “Adel” up there is Adel Gabot, consulting editor of the mag
and co-host with fellow editorial consultant Jayvee (Fernandez) of one
of the segments. I’m posting this in reaction to one of the entries on
their site, using trackback.

God is good, and the Trackback is one more piece of evidence