[luau] OpenSourceAdvocates

[Jimen Ching]

On 9 Oct 2002, Warren Togami wrote:
>In advocating for a law that OUTLAWS proprietary software, we do not
>compete solely on merit.

Are they OUTLAW'ing proprietary software?  I am not aware they are doing
that.  I thought they were requiring all government purchased software to
be compliant with free software licenses.

>I totally agree here.  They should spend it on "good software".
>Unfortunately Open Source Software and Free Software is not always
>technically superior.  We shouldn't make it law and force them to use
>technically inferior software.  That is not "free choice".

I don't think government people are that stupid.  I don't think these
people are forcing the government to buy software that doesn't work.  And
who is to decide whether a software application is superior or inferior?
Perhaps we should debate on the specific legislation on a case by case
basis.  If those advocates are actually doing what you say they are doing,
then I agree with you 100 percent.

>What areas are OSS sorely lacking?
>* Configuration Interfaces - lets face it, people don't like to edit
>text files.
>* Well integrated desktop interface
>* Easy software installation (not just stuff made available in some
>package or auto-installed tarball, that is way too hard)
>*  Management Tools - Don't tell me with a straight face that we have
>anything better than Microsoft SQL Enterprise Manager.  (Although I
>suspect TOra comes close, I haven't had a chance to use it much.)
>* Overall learning curve.  It is harder to learn most of our stuff.
>* Documentation - on the average our documentation stinks.
>* probably a lot more...

You must think all these things grow on trees.  No one is fixing these
areas because no one is paying for it.  Government purchases are done with
contracts.  It is these contract dollars that will get these things done.
The government, just like any business, want solutions, not products.
When the government buys a contract, the contractor will provide these
things.

Also, you probably don't know this, since you are still in college, but in
the real world business people don't read documentation.  They don't
install their own software.  They don't manage their own computers and
networks.  They don't educate themselves on the use of the software.
Most businesses have IT departments or IT people to do these things for
them.  This is why people like Brian, Scott, and Ho'ala, are able to make
a living.  To the government, the list above means nothing.  I bet most of
the IT people working for the government would prefer to work with Free
Software.  But they don't, because it is the politicians that make the
decisions.  But luckily for us, we can affect that decision.

>I myself BELIEVE in Open Source and Free Software.  I use it whenever
>possible even though I know it would be easier to do a certain job using
>some proprietary software, even if I own that proprietary software.

I'm glad to hear that.  Though I don't see how this applies to the
government purchased software.

>However, we cannot convince people on purely idealism.  Technical merit
>and price are the only things that will convince people to stop using
>proprietary software.

As Ron said in an earlier post, people don't choose software on merit,
they choose software out of fear.  The only way people will learn to use
any new software is if the software is placed in front of them.  Perhaps
if you let Scott Belford demonstrate his POS terminal like we planned,
some people might have seen that a simple ANSI display is as easy to use
as any GUI.

I have heard Brian's view point, and I have heard Scott's view point, and
I have read tales from Ron.  I have also read Bruce Peren's and Tim
O'Reilly's opinions.  I'll give you one guess who I'll believe...

--jc
-- 
Jimen Ching (WH6BRR)      jching at flex.com     wh6brr at uhm.ampr.org