max.lueb.be

Reading slashdot this week, I came across an article talking about a new effort by Microsoft called linuxpersonas.com, which is an online sales kit for Microsoft technologies at the enterprise level and talk various customer profiles out of using Linux. Needless to say, as a consultant that makes part of his living by pitching open-source, and doing installations and maintenance of these free platforms – it’s hard to flip through this site without doing some serious eye-rolling.

In any case, I think this site underscores a serious weakness in Linux/OSS in general – that is, that there is not very much in the way of organized efforts to expand the marketshare with regards to traditional marketing. All too often, Linux and related technologies seem to rely on Field of Dreams style promoting, “If we build it, they will come.” The development community at times seems to be so in love with what they have created, that they consider the dominance of their platform inevitable. To me this feels strangely similar to Karl Marx preaching about the natural evolution to communism, and the historical inevitability of the demise of Capitalism – the point being, both arguments as far as I’m concerned are pie in the sky dreaming.

If Linux is going to succeed and get the percentage of machines with it installed to the point where it becomes more than a buzzword seen in CNN technology section articles, or something a IT Manager will take a 24 hour crash course in, somebody needs to sell it. It is important to clarify here that I am not proposing that we go and throw a pricetag on a shrinkwrapped install disc – when I say sell, I mean that people need to get in the trenches and go out getting businesses and everyday people to get this software on their computers. We need to see sites popping up that are the equivilent of linuxpersonas.com, but are designed to help consultants convince their customers to run Linux in their company. We also need real, legitimate advertising by the dominant players of our platform. When Ubuntu 7.04 ships next month, billionaire Mark Shuttleworth should sink some serious money into conventional advertising to get his product noticed by people who have never even heard the term Linux before. We should see MySQL running some ads in Computer Publications comparing their product to MSSQL or Oracle offerings.

Novell has started to do this in some respects by making some parodies of the infamous Apple Computer Mac Guy / PC Guy ads, and introducing a girl character named Linux, but at this point these ads aren’t very effective at doing much more than getting a quick laugh out of nerds who already know about Linux and love it. I would like to see a Novell ad where the three characters are talking about going out for an OS upgrade (which could be new clothes or something) and they all open their wallets and show how much the overhaul will cost them. The PC guy takes out a stack of $100 bills and talks about how he’ll need Vista Ultimate and a copy of Office 2007, the Apple guy takes out a $100 bill for a Leopard upgrade, but also has a lot of smaller bills he plans on spending on the Mac shareware community. At this point the camera pans over to the Linux character who is having all of her stuff bought for her by a crowd of people, including some people with briefcases full of money, who are wearing shirts with IBM, Red Hat and other corporate logos.

Until we see a serious marketing effort on the behalf of Linux technology, I have a hardtime concieving any major marketshare growth of open-source technology. In the meantime, redmondpersonas.com is registered and under development. Check back soon!

Youtube is usually a great place for a quick laugh while at work, or to savor illegally uploaded copywrighted material – but it also occasionally is a great source for finding documentation on computing history.

One clip worth watching is the Boston Macworld Expo in 1997 – which was the return of Steve Jobs to Apple, his shuffling of the Board of Directors and his plan to return Apple to profitability. Among his key points are focusing on the markets where Apple was still relevant (Education and Creative Professionals) , as well getting Apple innovating again – the company itself needs to “Think Different”. In short, almost like a communist government in the 60′s, Jobs outlines a “5 Year Plan” to modernize the company and catch up with the West.

10 years later, Steve Jobs has delivered everything he promised and more.

I can’t think of one of my friends at Columbia College studying art who doesn’t either already have a Mac, or have plans for aquiring one as soon as possible. Steve mentions in this video that 60% of all websites are designed on Mac Hardware, and now in 2007 Mac’s are by far the defacto dev machine of choice when designing anything for the web due to their UNIX plumbing and the ability to run every browser on the market natively.

I find it interesting to watch the Macworld 97 video, where Apple was on extremely shaky ground with an uncertain future and then watch clips from this year’s conference where it seems Apple is only headed toward further forms of world domination and hightech conquest.

Something interesting to consider, is where was Microsoft during this 10 year period? With their oldest and classic competitor on the ropes, Microsoft chose not to deliver a knockout punch – instead it decided to go pick flowers or some other completely unrelated activity, while its historic nemesis rebuilt itself.

I know that cooperation was emphasized in the 97 Conference, but what Microsoft chose to do can only be described as “traditional Microsoft thinking”. That is, ignore the market, ignore your customers and overdevelop by committee thinking products designated by tradition and the insular culture at Redmond. The type of thinking that dictates, who cares what the rest of the world does, because we assume that they will all do what we tell them, use our standards and technologies as soon as we release them, that the world is ready to snap in line, repent their misguided ways, and do things the Microsoft way on release day.

What has Microsoft done in any of the area specified by Jobs? Web design with state of the art Frontpage? Edit videos with Microsoft Movie Maker?

Give me a break.

Any person in the creative fields use Microsoft products only because they are forced to by work or by budget. It is a coincidence that Adobe compiles their application suite for Windows because its a big market share, not because of any brilliant strategy by Redmond.

As a recent convert to the cult of Mac, I only regret not doing it sooner as my Macbook Pro is by far the best machine I’ve ever owned – and I can’t wait to see what the future holds for Apple 10 years from now.

While in college I became a huge fan of the Linux operating system due to the unrestricted freedom it granted me when using it in place of the Windows software I had grown up with. If I wanted to try my hand at a new programming language or play with a new technology, Linux let me me do this with professional grade tools for no cost. This led to an initial period of Linux zealotry, as I tried to convince the masses of my discovery and how it was infinitely superior to anything I had ever used. As I grew older though, my perceptions matured and I began to see Linux through the perspectives of several other groups involved in its creation.

The first perspective I noticed was the “Free as in Cost Group”. This group endorses Linux because it is a way of circumventing the Microsoft tax, which in many cases would put computing out of their reach financially. If I’m setting up a computer lab or cafe in the third world trying to connect locals to the internet for the first time, in an environment where resources are scarce – my options are to pirate copies of Windows (probably an older version too, if I’m having to cobble together whatever machines I can find and performance is going to be an issue) or to run a free operating system. Linux allows me top notch security, a basic office setup, compilers for anything imaginable and web browsers to get onto the internet, and best of all it costs nothing. I will never have to pay anyone a dime to get my operation running, so this makes it incredibly appealing to me.

The perspective group I belonged to I’ll call the “Superior Product Group”. I switched to Linux because it gave me freedom of choice and was infinitely more stable and secure than the software it replaced. The title of this post is a quote from one of my favorite bands – NOFX, this perspective of Linux favors “Freedom like a shopping cart” – I can do whatever I want with my machine and the software it contains. The only limiting factors are how fast my machine will run and how deep my knowledge is of the tasks I’d like my computer to do. Everything I could ever want in a computing platform is available to me, and if it’s not – the documentation for me to write my own fixes is available.

Finally there is the group I’ll call the “Patrick Henry Group” who is very vocal about his famous quote “Give me liberty, or give me death.” This camp is led by Richard Stallman, head of the Free Software Foundation of FSF, who launched the GNU project back in the 80s and is responsible for emacs and the whole GNU toolchain. Stallman and the FSF’s main prerogative is the abolition of proprietary software, they believe that all software should be free of cost, with the accompanying source code open as well, so that whomever receives it is free to change it and redistribute it – provided they do so under the terms that they received the software originally. The license to do this is called the GNU Public License, or GPL for short.

This last group is one lately I’ve found myself at odds with due to their actions to try and bring my favorite distribution of Linux (Ubuntu) completely under their politics. To start with, the biggest issue I have with widespread acceptance of GPL as the dominant way software is published on Earth, is that it will impoverish me. Before I went to engineering school and learned about calculus, physics and computer science, I worked bad minimum wage jobs ranging from getting yelled at all day by angry customers in a video store to my three year tenure scrubbing toilets as a janitor. As a computer programmer by profession, I pay my bills, keep myself fed and a roof over my head due to my ability to write software. The only thing keeping me from living off a couch in my parents’ basement (assuming they’d let me) or flipping burgers to make ends meet is writing proprietary software for customers willing to pay for it. If the profession of Computer Programmer becomes obsolete due to all software being freely created by volunteers, I will be forced to return to jobs similar to the ones I previously held – because I certainly will not have the resources to retrain into another discipline I can make a living at. One common counterclaim to this argument is that a system of bounties will allow programmers to stay employed, where people with deep pockets will offer cash for programmers to work on problems they want solved. I find this ridiculous due to the current realities of this on the internet, bounties are few and far between – and the time investment involved in completing them far outweighs any financial gain. No company is ever going to support this model, because whatever competitive advantage via software they hire people to write them for that company’s domain specific need will immediately fall into the hands of their competitors for free. There is no sustainability in this model, and it is nothing better than pie-in-the-sky, idealistic thinking.

Getting back to the issue I began to address, my Linux distribution of choice – Ubuntu, one which I have been using since its initial 4.10 release, is under increasing pressure by the Patrick Henry group. This group wants to remove from the distribution any code that is not 100% free by their standards, which includes but is not limited to: device drivers distributed in binary form, and media codecs. The alternative to these “not entirely, but mostly free” software packages are ones penned by the free software community that are not as good in terms of performance, features or stability. In my mind this is completely unacceptable.

I happen to have an NVidia graphics card in my Linux workstation (albeit an old, weak 440MX) that I use in conjunction with the official NVidia binary drivers to get acceptable 3d performance in visualizing 3d data and running dual displays. The FSF replacement for which is not complete, and not up to par with features and performance. Buying a new video card right now is not an option, because money is tight – I picked Linux for freedom of choice, and now a 3rd party is telling me how I can use my computer in accordance with their politically imposed restrictions. In my mind, this isn’t much different than Microsoft, except that I’m getting my prison shackles for free instead of paying for them. Similar issues are numerous right now with wireless card drivers, although thankfully this is not a problem for me as my connection is hardwired. The solution in this case is to not use wireless connectivity? Again, completely unacceptable.

The other main fire-fight with this group occurs over the usage of ‘closed’ media codecs. Due to licensing, some media formats are not supported by default in Ubuntu and only “semi-free” packages are capable of playing files encoded with them. If I’m a user migrating from Windows to Linux as I did back in 2003, and I suddenly find out that the hundreds of dollars of music in ITunes I’ve purchased are no longer playable on my machine because of somebody else’s political views regarding ideal codecs, the migration ends before it begins. I’m not going to give up my music and the money I invested in it because its encoding is not politically kosher.

In closing, I am fine with come of these semi-free, non-FSF packages not being installed by default, with their free equivalents being installed in their place to promote the ideals of free software. I am only ok with this, because I still have the option right after a clean install to get rid of all of them and install packages that provide better performance and features as the first order of business. One of the common selling points of Linux to try and convert a Microsoft user is that “it just works”. No viruses, no spyware, or any of the other common problems associated with running Windows. If you check the Launchpad site for Ubuntu, the #1 bug is that Microsoft has a majority market share. In order to undo this, a large majority of the people we need to convert are regular everyday users who just need to get work done. They don’t program, and could care less that the source is open or GPL’d. If they test drive Ubuntu, and nothing works right out of the gate because of politics – the lifespan of Linux on that computer is only as long as the time until reboot, because there’s no way in hell it’s getting moved to the hard drive for even a dual-boot, let alone a Windows replacement. The point of this article is not that I hate free and open software, or that I’m waving a flag for proprietary – it’s that I’ve realized what’s most important to me at the end of the day is the freedom to choose. I’m fairly sure that I’m not alone either.

New ram arrived in the mail this week – 1 gig of Crucial DDR400, thus the Linux Desktop is back in action. Writing this post from my newly installed Ubuntu 7.04 Herd 4 partition. I’ve got 6.10 on here as well, but I figured its better late than never to do what I can for the release in April.

I’ve got the basic css design done on the new wordpress version of the site. Still needs some work, but I am now at operational status.

Lately I’ve been swamped and haven’t had much time to do anything besides eat, work and sleep. Around the beginning of the year, I did all the typical new years resolving to get my life in order – at the top of that list was quitting smoking (almost two months strong now!) and getting back in school to finish my education. So far I’ve finished my application to UIC and am in the process of finishing up my applications to University of Chicago and Northwestern. The latter two are definitely reach schools, but I think I’ve got a shot, and not trying I’m sure I’d regret for the rest of my life. The latter two are also extremely long with multiple essays.

I thought I’d post the most interesting prompt from the Northwestern application and see if I have any readers yet – and if I do, what their thoughts would be.

Isaac Newton once wrote, “If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants.” Whose work would you most like to continue in your lifetime and why?

The interesting thing about this question when thinking about the computing field is that so many of our heroes, pioneers and founding fathers are still alive and working! Probably a majority of them still have the bulk of their careers left due to what life expectancy is these days, and how relatively young this field is.

So far I’m deciding between writing about Steve Wozniak, John Von Neumann or somehow talking about the digital divide. Who would you write about?

I’ll get back in the writing groove this week I promise.

Happy Chinese New Year, Internet.
Today starts the year of the pig.
Today starts IntentionallyObsolete v2.0