Open source software

In the early days of computers, idealism was very much alive and well on the software development side of the equation. Software developers shared their knowledge, including computer code, with one another freely. By doing so they could tap into the collective knowledge of fellow professionals to solve any problems they might encounter. By allowing others to modify their code, they could develop software that was stable, user friendly and readily available to the end user at little or no charge.

These idealistic individuals actually believed that the benefits of personal computing should be available to everyone, not just the well off and wealthy.

And then came Microsoft.

To give Bill Gates and his buddy Steve their due, Microsoft has done a pretty good job of making computers user friendly and opening up the wonderful world of personal computing to the average man (or woman) on the street. The Windows environment is easy to work in and relatively stable for the average user. But . . .

I’ve been using Windows XP for several years. And, over those years, I’ve had to activate (or re-activate) the system four times. It’s not a lengthy process and some people may consider it a minor inconvenience. To me, however, it’s a major infringement on my privacy rights. And, I also object to the “guilty until proven innocent” attitude of Microsoft’s activation process.

Judges routinely order criminals to wear electronic monitoring devices, after a hearing or trial has confirmed their guilt. Microsoft demands that they be permitted to conduct electronic surveillance of my computer system, without the benefit of a hearing. After paying to use their damned operating system, they want me to prove that I’m innocent of piracy any time they decide it’s convenient for them. It would be unacceptable to most people if they were required to contact Ford or GM to get permission to re-start their automobile after changing the oil or installing new spark plugs. Why is it acceptable behaviour from Microsoft?

And Windows Vista is even more restrictive; you are simply not allowed to move the operating system to new hardware. As well, the Microsoft activation process is being applied to most, if not all, of the Microsoft product line.

Then, there’s the cost.

Fortunately, there are alternatives to Microsoft Windows. Most incarnations of Linux (Red Hat, Ubuntu, etc.) have a GUI (graphical user interface), an application task bar and an office document processing environment, thanks to open source software. And, since it’s free, it can be used on any system, with any hardware, on as many computers as you might choose to install it.

You can get (or make) “live” CDs that allow you to transport the operating system to any computer via a bootable disc. You choose as many applications as you need, all at little or no cost.

Microsoft is not happy with open source software.

While claiming it doesn’t want to litigate the issue, Microsoft is demanding that it be paid royalties on patents they “own”. I understand the concept of copyright, but I’m not exactly sure how anyone can patent software anymore than they can patent mathematics. You can copyright a song, but you can’t patent the idea of a song and then demand royalties from anyone who writes a song. But that’s what Microsoft is claiming; that they’re entitled to patent the idea behind a computer application.

The European Union has turned thumbs down on software patents. And rightly so. The United States has been allowing people to register patents, but some recent court cases suggest that any legal action for patent infringement will meet with limited success.

Microsoft wants nothing less than complete control over the computer operating system market. Their only competition is from Mac and Gnu/Linux.

It’s clear that Microsoft is afraid of the concept of open source software, otherwise they wouldn’t be turning their considerable legal and financial might against those who produce it.

Open source software is still a small market to be sure, but it’s here to stay; and, it’s gaining ground in the end user market; losing it’s “for geeks only” connotation. And, as the many manifestations of Linux become easier to use for the average Joe, it will continue to erode Microsoft’s current advantage in the market place.

And, you simply can’t beat the price. That’s making Microsoft very nervous.