summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/software-libre-commercial-viability.html
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to 'talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/software-libre-commercial-viability.html')
-rw-r--r--talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/software-libre-commercial-viability.html343
1 files changed, 343 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/software-libre-commercial-viability.html b/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/software-libre-commercial-viability.html
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b26f198
--- /dev/null
+++ b/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/en/software-libre-commercial-viability.html
@@ -0,0 +1,343 @@
+<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
+<!-- Parent-Version: 1.77 -->
+<title>Software Libre and Commercial Viability
+- GNU Project - Free Software Foundation</title>
+<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/software-libre-commercial-viability.translist" -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
+<h2>Software Libre and Commercial Viability</h2>
+
+<blockquote>
+<p>(Nov 12th 1998, published in February 1999)</p>
+</blockquote>
+
+<p>
+by <strong>Alessandro Rubini</strong></p>
+
+<p>Fortunately, Linus' project of world domination is going to come true
+fairly soon. The trend toward this goal can be verified by checking
+how the press is behaving towards GNU/Linux solutions, looking at how
+several educational entities are going to introduce Free Software in
+the schools and verifying its usual technical excellence.</p>
+
+<p>Today in 1998 (yes, it is still 1998 as I write), the most
+important job remaining, in my opinion, is propagating the social and
+commercial implications of Free Software. While I greatly appreciated
+Russell Nelson's article &ldquo;Open Source Software Model&rdquo; in
+the July issue of <i>LJ</i>, I feel the need to expand on the points
+he briefly touched.</p>
+
+<p>Please note that I'm not an expert in economics or politics. I'm
+just a build-it-yourself kind of technical guy whose discussion is
+based on his own experience in the battle for survival, in the hopes
+of helping someone else adapt to new environmental conditions. Some of
+these ideas have already been discussed with friends or on the Free
+Software Business mailing list
+(<a href="mailto:fsb-subscribe@crynwr.com">&lt;fsb-subscribe@crynwr.com&gt;</a>),
+which I joined after reading Russell's article.</p>
+
+<h3 id="sec1">Viability for Individual Consultants</h3>
+
+<p>The best feature of any computer system is flexibility &mdash;
+allowing users to tailor its behaviour to their own needs. This
+flexibility is often completely unknown to the general computer user,
+because proprietary software solutions tend to hide functionality
+behind a rigid external interface which denies any divergence from the
+expected behaviour&mdash;a <i>user's</i> behaviour.</p>
+
+<p>When adopting Free Software, users are able to discover the real
+power of computer systems. Today I talked with a commercial consultant
+who never thought that programs could be adapted to one's needs. He
+confessed his company has always acted the other way around&mdash;they
+adapted their needs to the software they use. Most users are victims
+of their software and don't even realize it.</p>
+
+<p>Educating the user base about the extendibility of software will
+open new markets to independent consultants, creating new employment
+opportunities. Every user has different needs and solving these needs
+often means calling for technical support from people who tailor or
+enhance the relevant software. While this is not even imaginable with
+proprietary programs, source availability allows any problem that
+might arise to be quickly solved and new features to be easily
+added. While you may think this would quickly lead to a <i>perfect</i>
+software package, individual needs are so diverse and specialized that
+a package can't satisfy everyone.</p>
+
+<p>For example, I and others wrote a program for a local physiology
+center to analyze data for a typical kind of experiment. During two
+years of use, the physicians found so many ways to enhance the program
+that it is now reported as better than the commercial solutions. The
+total of all fees they paid during these years reveals the program to
+be more expensive in the end than some of the commercial
+alternatives. This fact is not relevant to my clients, as they have
+exactly what they want and they know they can have more should the
+need arise. The program is obviously Free Software and other centers
+expressed interest in getting a copy.</p>
+
+<p>As more and more people are choosing Free Software to address their
+needs, I'm sure some software companies will try to demonize GNU/Linux
+and both the Free Software and the Open Source movements because they
+are losing their own market share. Such companies will probably try to
+demonstrate that IT employment is decreasing and that humankind is
+being damaged by the general adoption of Free Software. This whole
+argument is bogus; computers exist to be programmed, and the more you
+allow programming them, the more you build employment opportunities.
+If you count the number of people who offer Free Software consulting,
+you will greatly exceed any shrinkage of proprietary companies.
+Sticking to my previous example, the physiology lab hired my company
+to write the program, and other centers interested in the product are
+willing to hire a local consultant for installing, maintaining and
+enhancing our package. Did I say &ldquo;enhance&rdquo;? Isn't the
+program working? Yes, the program is working well, but there <i>is</i>
+room for enhancement of the product. The local lab decided to stop
+development &ldquo;because we must run our experiment rather than
+invent new software features&rdquo;. As anyone knows, every program
+has a bug and a missing feature, and this is where we build our
+credibility: bugs <i>can</i> be fixed and features <i>can</i> be
+implemented. As I suggested before, the more you make things
+programmable, the more they will be programmed.</p>
+
+<p>Why should there be more employment opportunities in IT than there
+are now? First of all, because Free Software users have more requests
+for new features than users of proprietary products do, as explained
+above. Next, because anyone can build her own professionalism without
+paying tributes to access the sources of information. I built my own
+expertise by studying source code and trying things out on my own
+low-end PC. Now I am confident I can solve any problem my clients
+might have, and my clients know I can (provided I am given enough time
+to deal with the problem).</p>
+
+<p>Another critical point in addition to source availability is
+standardization on file formats, a field where proprietary products
+are revealing their worst features. Let's imagine an environment where
+every file format in the system was known: you could, for example,
+create indexes from any document that is produced, thus easing later
+retrieval. This can be accomplished off-line without any load on
+non-technical personnel. Asynchronous reuse of data is &ldquo;rocket
+science&rdquo; for many users, because they are accustomed to programs
+that use proprietary file formats (and operating systems with no real
+multi-tasking or &ldquo;cron&rdquo; capabilities). As soon as free
+standards are adopted, users begin asking for customizations and are
+willing to pay for anything that will increase their productivity.
+Moreover, free standards guarantee that customers are not making the
+wrong bet, as they won't ever be stuck with unusable data if the
+software market changes.</p>
+
+<p>While the conventional model of software distribution concentrates
+all knowledge in a few companies (or one of them), open standards
+leverage technical knowledge to anyone willing to learn. Whereas a
+proprietary product can be supported only by a limited number of
+qualified consultants (whose number and quality is centrally managed),
+the number of consultants supporting a Free Software solution is
+virtually unlimited and the offer can quickly adapt to the request.</p>
+
+<p>In a world where computers are just tools to accomplish some other
+goals, easy customization and quick maintenance are basic requirements
+of power users. In my opinion, Free Software will quickly gain the
+trust it needs to be a real market phenomenon. As soon as you start to
+trust some Free Software products, you learn that they deserve more.
+GNU/Linux fans must be ready to offer support in order to fulfill the
+upcoming need for consultants.</p>
+
+<h3 id="sec2">Viability for Support Companies</h3>
+
+<p>Obviously, independent consultants don't cover all the needs of
+computer users. Several activities can't be handled by
+individuals. Red Hat and S.u.S.E. are demonstrating that creating and
+maintaining a distribution can be a good source of revenue even when
+the product is freely redistributable. Debian-based efforts are on the
+way, although less advanced&mdash;mainly because both Red Hat and
+S.u.S.E. bundled proprietary products with libre packages in order to
+survive while the market share was low, while Debian has always been
+completely detached from proprietary products, and still is.</p>
+
+<p>In addition to &ldquo;creating and packaging&rdquo; or
+&ldquo;collecting and packaging&rdquo; jobs, companies can specialize
+in technical support, covering the situations where computer systems
+are of critical importance. Big business realities using computer
+systems in their productive environment won't be satisfied with either
+the external consultant or the in-house technician. They need to rely
+on an external structure that guarantees round-the-clock operation of
+their technological aids.</p>
+
+<p>Even if GNU/Linux or any other operating system is demonstrated to
+be completely reliable, power users will need to rely on a support
+company as a form of insurance. The more important computers are for a
+production environment, the more people are willing to pay to be
+reassured that everything will go on working and to have someone
+&ldquo;responsible&rdquo; to call in case of any failure. Such a
+&ldquo;power user&rdquo; support contract could also include a
+provision for refunds in case of down time. Big support companies will
+be able to efficiently deal with it, and clients will be happy to pay
+high rates even if they never need to call for assistance.</p>
+
+<p>In short, I see no need for software companies to keep exclusive
+rights on their products; the support environment is big enough to
+offer good business positions in Information Technologies. Those who
+want to be at the top could use some of the revenue to pay for Free
+Software development, thus gaining access to the best software before
+anyone else and associating their name with software products. As a
+matter of fact, this practice is already pursued by the big
+distributions.</p>
+
+<h3 id="sec3">Viability for Education Centers</h3>
+
+<p>Needless to say, schools and universities have the best interest in
+teaching information technologies using Free Software tools. Due to
+its technical superiority, Free Software environments have more to
+offer to the students, but also need more technical knowledge to be
+proficiently administered. I see no money saved here in choosing Free
+operating systems over proprietary ones, but educational entities
+could better spend their money on hiring system administrators than on
+subsidizing some already-too-wealthy commercial software company.
+While my country, Italy, is stuck with a few rules that offer more
+support for buying things rather than for employing people, other
+countries are already moving in the right direction&mdash;Mexico and
+France, for example, have announced plans to use GNU/Linux in their
+public schools.</p>
+
+<p>One more point leads toward Free Software in education: when
+students get jobs, they prefer to use tools they learned at school in
+order to minimize extra learning efforts. This fact should lead
+colleges to teach only those tools not owned by anyone&mdash;those
+that are libre. Schools should teach proprietary software only if two
+conditions apply: no viable alternative is available, and the company
+that distributes such software <i>pays</i> the school for teaching its
+product. Paying someone for a product in order to advertising it for
+him is definitely nonsense.</p>
+
+<h3 id="sec4">Social Issues</h3>
+
+<p>A few social issues relate to choosing one software model over
+another one. Although I mark them as social, they have economic
+implications as well.</p>
+
+<p>
+While Free Software may not be cheaper than proprietary software if
+you bill for your own time, some environments use different rates in
+converting time to money. Most emerging countries have good
+intellectual resources but little money, and they usually have many
+not-so-new computers as well. Proprietary operating systems are
+unaffordable for them, but free solutions are viable and
+productive. Actually, the &ldquo;Halloween&rdquo; document supports my
+point by underlining that &ldquo;Linux&rdquo; is growing very fast in
+the Far East. Charity organizations usually have this same
+environment&mdash;little money and a good amount of human
+resources. This leads straight to the Free Software model for any IT
+requirement.</p>
+
+<p>These ideas will probably suggest that free availability of
+information looks fairly leftist in spirit, as &ldquo;information to
+the masses&rdquo; looks quite similar to the old adage &ldquo;power to
+the masses&rdquo;. What is usually ignored is the strong rightist
+flavour of the Free Software movement. The Free Software arena is
+fiercely meritocratic and a perfect environment for free competition,
+where the laws of the market ensure that only the best ideas and the
+best players survive. Proprietary standards, on the other hand, tend
+to diminish competition by decreasing innovation and consolidating
+previous results.</p>
+
+<h3 id="sec5">Limits of the Free Software Model</h3>
+
+<p>Naturally, I'm aware that not every software package can easily be
+turned into Free Software. I'm not talking about office
+products&mdash;I'm confident some good projects will supply this need,
+sooner or later.</p>
+
+<p>Rather, I'm talking about all environments where a strong
+competition exists for a product only loosely based on its software
+component. For example, industrial equipment might include a computer
+and some commodity hardware (a robot, custom I/O peripherals,
+<abbr title="Programmable logic controller">PLC</abbr>s, etc.); the
+software application hosted in the computer is a minor part of the
+whole, but its features greatly affect the overall value of the
+equipment. Producing and debugging such applications usually require
+huge investments; free redistribution of source code is thus prevented
+as a form of protection against competitors.</p>
+
+<p>Another meaningful example is cell telephones. They include a lot
+of software, even though this software is almost invisible to the end
+user, who perceives the device as a telephone and not a computer. Such
+software is the component that defines the overall capabilities of the
+device; because of its major functional role in the device it is
+strictly proprietary.</p>
+
+<p>Unfortunately, I see no easy way to liberalize this type of code.
+Although I don't care too much about cell phones (I don't use them :),
+I would really like to see free industrial applications because their
+technological content is usually worth reusing and adapting to new
+problems.</p>
+
+<hr />
+<p>Alessandro writes Free Software for a living and advocates Free
+Software for a mission. He hopes his upcoming child will keep off
+computers, recalling the good old times when such beasts where
+confined to their technical zoos. He reads e-mail
+as <a href="mailto:rubini@gnu.org">&lt;rubini@gnu.org&gt;</a> trying
+to reply to everyone.</p>
+
+<p>Reprinted with permission of Linux Journal.</p>
+
+</div><!-- for id="content", starts in the include above -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
+<div id="footer">
+<div class="unprintable">
+
+<p>Please send general FSF &amp; GNU inquiries to
+<a href="mailto:gnu@gnu.org">&lt;gnu@gnu.org&gt;</a>.
+There are also <a href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a>
+the FSF. Broken links and other corrections or suggestions can be sent
+to <a href="mailto:webmasters@gnu.org">&lt;webmasters@gnu.org&gt;</a>.</p>
+
+<p><!-- TRANSLATORS: Ignore the original text in this paragraph,
+ replace it with the translation of these two:
+
+ We work hard and do our best to provide accurate, good quality
+ translations. However, we are not exempt from imperfection.
+ Please send your comments and general suggestions in this regard
+ to <a href="mailto:web-translators@gnu.org">
+ &lt;web-translators@gnu.org&gt;</a>.</p>
+
+ <p>For information on coordinating and submitting translations of
+ our web pages, see <a
+ href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
+ README</a>. -->
+Please see the <a
+href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
+README</a> for information on coordinating and submitting translations
+of this article.</p>
+</div>
+
+<!-- Regarding copyright, in general, standalone pages (as opposed to
+ files generated as part of manuals) on the GNU web server should
+ be under CC BY-ND 3.0 US. Please do NOT change or remove this
+ without talking with the webmasters or licensing team first.
+ Please make sure the copyright date is consistent with the
+ document. For web pages, it is ok to list just the latest year the
+ document was modified, or published.
+
+ If you wish to list earlier years, that is ok too.
+ Either "2001, 2002, 2003" or "2001-2003" are ok for specifying
+ years, as long as each year in the range is in fact a copyrightable
+ year, i.e., a year in which the document was published (including
+ being publicly visible on the web or in a revision control system).
+
+ There is more detail about copyright years in the GNU Maintainers
+ Information document, www.gnu.org/prep/maintain. -->
+
+<p>Copyright &copy; 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001 Alessandro Rubini</p>
+
+<p>Verbatim copying and redistribution of this entire article are permitted
+in any medium provided this notice and the copyright notice are preserved.
+</p>
+
+<!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" -->
+
+<p class="unprintable">Updated:
+<!-- timestamp start -->
+$Date: 2014/04/12 12:40:46 $
+<!-- timestamp end -->
+</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+</body>
+</html>