Obama Looking At Open Source? 306
An anonymous reader writes "'The secret to a more secure and cost effective government is through Open Source technologies and products.'
The claim comes from one of Silicon Valley's most respected business leaders Scott McNealy, a co-founder of Sun Microsystems.
He revealed he has been asked to prepare a paper on the subject for the new administration."
Eh. It was about time (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah. (Score:5, Insightful)
Next week: Steve Ballmer himself visits the White House...
McNealy? (Score:5, Insightful)
I was starting to write here that McNealy is an odd choice for this, since he was somewhat dragged kicking-and-screaming to OSS.
But thinking about it, I actually can't think of a better choice. I can understand the administration wanting a "red blooded" businessman to write the paper rather than wild-eyed OSS advocate that might be less than objective about the pros and cons of OSS versus proprietary software. McNealy really does have a broad background... he's run a major business, he's sold proprietary software, and he's made major releases in OSS software.
He's actually a pretty good choice.
Re:McNealy? (Score:3, Insightful)
Is there really a better choice? Yes. Scott is tied to Sun, and I like Sun as a company, but you won't find another company short of RedHat that is pushing free software as much as Sun. Sun doesn't really care much about open source so much. They want whatever it takes to kill or bring down Microsoft AND perhaps more importantly sell their hardware.
I am a HUGE fan of open source software and have switched most of a business to run on it. I am also a fan of Sun, but I have to admit that there are times when buying software or "proprietary" software is the right choice. As much as I hate dealing with the idiots that mandate "buy only Microsoft", I also don't like the idiots that say "only use open source".
Having said all this, it will be interesting to see what the new administration does on this.
Fortune 500, Government, Big (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The real secret...... (Score:3, Insightful)
The problem with the US Postal Service is not that it is being
treated more like a business. Infact, that is the root of it's
problem. They want to push this illusion that the Postal Service
can or is self supporting.
It is not and never was meant to be a clone of FedEx.
It was intended to be a necessary public service, not an outlet for spam.
The jokers in charge responsible for the current state of the postal
service should be strapped down Clockwork Orange style and forced to
watch "The Postman".
Re:McNealy? (Score:5, Insightful)
Careful consideration and healthy skepticism isn't really "Kicking-and-Screaming". ...
I myself take open source by a need by need basis.
I will use Photoshop over the GIMP
I use Apache over IIS
I use Linux for a server Mac OS X for a desktop.
I prefer Microsoft SQL Server over MySQL
Open Source has the Free as in Beer quality, as well they tend to have ports to multiple platforms, or soon will. Sometimes it is nice to go under the hood and add some hooks to get my job done better.
However there are also a lot of Bad Open Source apps out there which will take me more time to make good that it would be cheaper to get a closed source version and deal with stuff I cant change.
I personally don't like RMS vision of all software Free and Open Source, it has its place and its advantages. However we still need close source applications to drive the market. Running of a support model insures your software never gets easy enough to use without the support. Also close source software has the mix bag of PHB controlling the projects, which sometimes hinders it abilities, and sometime pushes people to do things they just don't want to do. "Oh that interface is difficult to use and not orders in the way that people use the app". Competition is good, competition only works well when we have an well educated consumers who can really balance the pro's and con's without falling into political nonsense.
A better first step (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Open source has been "looked at" (Score:5, Insightful)
I would say that depending on where you are, there's certainly no question that there is a lot of Windows on the desktop. There are many reasons for this.
The main place where open source shines is in central service delivery...the client is irrelevant. The client piece is more complicated: sure, you can argue cost benefits for running Linux on the desktop, but even on the unclass side, there are still practical benefits to using a commodity OS. Some of it is management, some of it is tools. A lot of it comes back to familiarity of the user...in that setting who doesn't know Windows and Microsoft Office?
I don't think open source on the desktop is the place to start. The place that open source software can make the most impact and positively affect the most people, at present, is on the server and service end of things.
Oh rly? (Score:4, Insightful)
...overall it has been estimated that the global loss due to proprietary software is "in excess of $1 trillion a year."
That's the same kind of lame-ass no-evidence silly figure pushing that the RIAA and MPAA uses to sell their Anti-Piracy measures. I love Linux and I'd love to see it spread even more but this way of propagating it is just retarded. You get Microsoft software for your money, be that a good investment or not is your decision. It's clearly not a "loss" it's merely a costly under-utilization of alternatives.
I tend to praise Linux and rant against Microsoft but this OSI guy Tiemann just blew the frame by using the same silly and faulty means of propaganda rhetoric. One thing I try to learn and live by is "Just because THEY do it doesn't mean we have to or even should do it too". By pulling figures out of his ass to make himself look more interesting he's not a single notch better than Microsoft with it's installbase or the supposed piracy figures by the media companies. That is just NOT the way to convince people of the right thing.
Re:McNealy? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:McNealy? (Score:2, Insightful)
The more I learn about science, the more my faith in God increases.
Hmm, I find the more I learn about God, the more thankful I am that science doesn't require any blind faith.
Re:The real secret...... (Score:4, Insightful)
I work for the Postal Service as a contractor (Probably half of IT work in the USPS is done by contractors).
The USPS employs at least 1 employee in every Post Office in the country, significant amounts of administration and behind the scenes operations to support its primary function. In many rural locales, the Post Office is the only presence the Federal Government has nearby, which is why draft registrations and passports involve the Postal Service.
Now, if we get rid of the business that the Postal Service does handling junk mail, the cost of first class and package shipping will have to go up a significant amount to cover all of the costs to maintain that entire workforce. If bulk mail is half the cost of first class, and makes up 90% of the volume, then the cost of a first class stamp is going to have to go up to a $1.50 or more to make up the lost revenues. And if that happens, what will happen to the volume of first class mail and shipping packages? Would I love receiving less junk mail? Sure, but not at the cost of having to pay even more when I wanted to send something of my own.
And, I do think Open Source would help a lot. Once government computers are on non-proprietary systems, every vendor will support it, which will mean drivers for hardware, and familiarity for regular computer users. Once people are familiar with it, they'll decide to try it at home, and their kids will grow up with it. And once it starts to grow that way, software (games and the stuff you see on the shelf at Best Buy) will be written for the *nix environments. Then people will be able to choose based on the merits of the Open Source systems instead of saying, 'Oh, I can't use Linux, because it doesn't have Photoshop.' Then, Microsoft and Apple will have to do some pretty significant things to compete, and if they can't, they'll eventually become the minor players in the market. Unfortunately, if that ever comes to pass, it will be at least 15 years away.
Re:common misconception (Score:4, Insightful)
No, that is not the point at all. You're missing the point. Free/Open Source has the greatest potential to be better because it gets extensively peer reviewed and improved and thereby debugged and tested far more than any for profit company could ever afford to. Open source also means open standards. It means that you can watch streaming video without having to use MS Media Player but in a standards compliant MP4, AVI, or whatever other format. An open source website uses a browser agnostic and not requiring Internet Explorer in order to view it properly. Finally, and perhaps the largest advantage of open source is that hardware becomes open again. By forcing open source compliance, hardware will now be truely owned by the consumer. The consumer will not be forced into using Windows (or some NDIS wrapper) because a manufacturer, such as Broadcomm, deems open sourcing its drivers to be anti-competitive despite the fact that its drivers must be standards compliant to interoperate with other products. I hope Obama and his CIO will force the use of open source software. We are in a dawn of a new era now wherein it will take the collective effort of everyone to raise our country out of the ashes of our former president. Open source becomes one of the vehicles for large scale, rapid improvements not seen since the new deal.
Re:Open source has been "looked at" (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, at least with Office, it may no longer be the case.
While I've admittedly not been using MS products that much the past 3-4 years, in the past when I needed to do a quick word or excel doc, I could do it pretty quickly...like you said, you just 'know' it.
However, at my new gig...I was given a laptop with what I think is Office 2007....the one with the 'ribbon'? I swear, I'm still fairly lost on this thing...it took me an actually bit of research on the web to find the menu for a 'save as' option. I mean, it just wasn't intuitive for me to click that big round dot thing on the top left. I was looking for a normal menu option.
IMHO, this was a huge mistake for Office. I'm fairly computer literate...and it took ME some time to find things. I feel sorry for the secretary that isn't really computer savvy.
So, at this point with what MS did to Office and the complete change of menuing system, with no way to switch to classic mode...it might actually be easier to get people to use OO or something like it that more closely resembles MS Office classic..than current version of MS Office do.
Re:Well if this economy needs anything right now (Score:4, Insightful)
A significant problem with this model is that businesses with the resources to hire developers to program custom solutions often consider software, such as the custom solution they just paid for, to be competitive assets.
Businesses rightly consider it foolish to give assets that they paid for away to their competitors. As a result, they will often be reluctant to pay for a custom solution only to have their competitors receive it for free.
Consequently, they often choose to pay for custom solutions that are proprietary, so that their important IT business assets remain theirs and theirs alone. Alternatively, they will reach for proprietary, paid solutions ensuring that competitors who wish to use the same will incur the same costs. They'll then pay their own people or contractors to customize the proprietary solution, again, ensuring that the fruits of their investment in software accrue to them only and not their competitors.
Re:Eh. It was about time (Score:4, Insightful)
You mean the US, Myanmar and Libya?
Since scientific and engineering literature is almost always published in SI now, even not having the Yanks on board doesn't really matter to the rest of the world.
Re:Eh. It was about time (Score:3, Insightful)
And Great Britain, which refused to give up pints even under the withering glare of EU bureaucrats.
Most of us yokels here in the US regularly use and encounter both the metric system and traditional units. Converting is not difficult. Both systems being utterly arbitrary, we just prefer to choose whichever units are most convenient to the circumstances. Rather than, say, enforcing utterly stupid laws that seek to criminalize selling goods in unsanctioned weights and measures. We're just funny that way.
GovernmentOS (Score:1, Insightful)
Linux is not for everyone and cannot do everything Windows does. Mainly, this is because Windows is cared for by MS. MS makes deals and partnerships to get devices supported on Windows and Windows supported on devices. A partnership with MS is always profitable. Who does this sort of wheeling dealing on Linux behalf? How do you form a partnership with Linux? How profitable is such a partnership?
While they may never be able to run Linux on every government owned desktop/laptop, as the migration of applications to the web continues, as the open source community continues to add to its portfolio of great applications, I believe government should be able to replace more and more Windows computers with Linux computers (or BSD).
The government should endorse and utilize (to whatever degree) some distro of Linux or BSD. Furthermore, the government should contribute to chosen distro or actually create it if no suitable distro exists. This would have the following benefits (in no particular order):
- increase adoption of open-source software
- increase manufacturer and vendor support of open-source software
- create new technical jobs
- perhaps create other misc. jobs since the overhead cost of software will be reduced
- increase interoperability and adoption of standards
I feel the need to stress that last one. Since the beginning of history, governments have developed, endorsed, and enforced standards. It's a basic foundational component of order, law, and government. In this day and age, our economy is based on business that is conducted on computers running operating systems and applications transmitting data through the internet and other networks. It makes perfect sense for the government to take a more active role in the forces that shape and govern technology.
dumb-ass, now MSFT is going to write dozens to tel (Score:2, Insightful)
to tell the new administration why open source is so bad and it is probably going to center around how important Microsoft is to the US economy. They'll say stuff like how many Windows based jobs there are and how they would be lost. It'll all be lies but the fact is that McNealy should have kept his mouth shut until after he'd written the paper and submitted it.
But wait, Scott McNealy is much smarter than Microsoft's PR people and lawyers. Hmmm, what happened the last time he thought that?
LoB
Re:Stuff that matters? (Score:2, Insightful)
All torture on Cuban soil in this millennium has been done by American hands? Apart from that being an insupportable statement (there's no way you,or anyone, could possibly prove it), it's also highly unlikely to be true.
The Cuban government, like totalitarian governments everywhere, keeps political prisoners. Even their normal jail conditions would probably constitute something pretty close to torture by our standards, without even delving into what they do there.
That doesn't mean I support our current Cuba policy - I don't, and have long considered it foolish when we have normal diplomatic relations with totalitarian governments all over the world, including communist ones, and including communist ones with which we have engaged in shooting wars. Throughout the Cold War, we maintained full diplomatic relations with the USSR. Up until our entry into World War II, we maintained diplomatic relations with Germany, Italy, and Japan. There is no rational reason to maintain this policy towards Cuba.
Why, then, do we do so? Because of the disproportionate political influence of Cuban-Americans, particularly in Florida. OK, for no reason that would appear rational to anyone but a politician :p
Here in California, there are within the Vietnamese community a strong general dislike of communism and a small but vociferous hardcore anti-communist movement which still dreams of the overthrow of the communist government in Viet Nam. The government pays about as much attention to that movement (if you can even call it that) than do I, which is to say none whatsoever. I'm aware of its existence and I notice the old RVN flags that some people still fly on flagpoles in their front yards, but I pay no attention. Why is it so different with the Cuban community and their anti-communists? The communist takeover in Cuba happened a lot longer ago, and yet people seem to care about it so much more.
It's time we stop caring about communism in Cuba, restore diplomatic relations, and get on with it. All we're doing in the meantime is denying a market to US business and tourism. However, to state tht the only torture being done in Cuba is being done by Americans is ridiculous.