Closed Source vs. Open Source in Desktop Linux, Jul 14, 2008

... closed source code is used everyday within the Linux world. And here’s the funny thing: most of us never really think twice about it.

It’s no surprise that this year’s Datamation Product of the Year Award in the Enterprise Linux category was snagged by Red Hat. The open source pioneer, founded in 1995 (a mere four years after Linus Torvalds released the first Linux kernel) has long been the dominant Linux vendor.

Does GNU/Linux need to run Windows apps? This question resurfaced last week, when the media noticed that Google has been contributing heavily to the Wine project, which develops a compatibility layer on GNU/Linux for running Windows applications.

At first, ranking GNU/Linux distributions seems alien to the spirit of free software. After all, free software is all about choice. What should matter is that your distro suits you, not how others judge it.

The Linux Kernel is one of the most fascinating bits of software out there, partially owing to the vast number of contributors who are responsible for creating it. The Kernel has spread into many areas of our lives; it is used extensively in embedded devices (where its presence goes largely unnoticed) and it is ubiquitous in servers. Its growing success in servers comes at the expense of other established software companies.

Right now, my candidate for the worst job isn't a nanny on a visa or a roofer on a hot summer day. It's being a publicist for Trend Micro. By launching a patent violation suit against Barracuda Networks for distributing a piece of free software called ClamAV, Trend Micro has created a public relations disaster for itself, and possibly a financial one as well.

What if I told you that it would actually be possible to see a Linux monopoly with the right components in place taking form within a short five-year period? That would be impossible due to licensing and availability, right?

Every now and then, someone suggests that Debian GNU/Linux should be more commercial. To further this goal, some create derivative distros like Linspire, Ubuntu, or Xandros, or organizations like the stillborn DCC Alliance. Others act as pundits, whispering advice from off-stage, like Debian founder Ian Murdock, or, more recently, columnist Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols.

Articles about Microsoft's bid have probably tired you to death by now, but this article discusses one particular aspect of the potential takeover, namely its effect on GNU/Linux and BSD users. Here's a point-by-point analysis of the impact, covering several of the key issues:

Contrary to what you may have heard, free and open source software (FOSS) is not anti-business. But neither is it pro-business.

Hearing the terms "free software" or "open source," you might imagine that they referred to a single school of thought. Even "free and open source software" (FOSS) suggests only two different outlooks: Free software, which values political and philosophical freedom, and open source, whose main interest is enhanced software quality.

How do you produce a major update of a popular desktop for GNU/Linux? Following the release of KDE 4.0 last week, I talked with Wade Olson, the press contact for KDE in North America, and a member of KDE e.V., the German non-profit organization that is the financial and legal arm of the project. Olson talked about the goals of the release, its highlights, what was left out, and where development of KDE is going next.

Ever since the dawn of commercial software, piracy has been a problem without a realistic solution that meets the needs of both the software vendor and the end user. From serial keys to outright DRM (digital rights management) schemes, the software industry has left no preventive measure untried.

Nearly every year for the last decade I've heard some pundit or vendor proclaim from the rooftops: This is the year of the Linux desktop. Yet, year in and year out, the proclamations don't materialize.

Linux might be free to download and install, and it might offer you freedoms that aren’t available from commercial software, but don’t let that fool you into thinking that everything about Linux is free. You might save money, but there are still hidden costs that need to be taken into account.

...for the most part, you can expect free software users to differ from proprietary in a number of fundamental ways.

While backers of mobile Linux are all trying to increase Linux adoption, the question for vendors has been which mobile Linux effort they should back among the crowd of mobile Linux organizations.

Who in the hell is Asustek, and why does Microsoft hate them more than any other company in the industry? Why does Apple, Dell and Palm Computing hate them?

Software licensed under the GPL open source license is considered to be Free Software but that doesn't mean it's free as in beer and that developers don't have rights.

When Richard Stallman announced the GNU Project back in 1983, he launched a movement that would, in time, transform the software industry. The Free Software Foundation, also created by Stallman and now sponsor of the GNU Project, has become a driving force behind the adoption of the widely used GNU GPL software license.