free software

Looking for information on free software can be troublesome, we gather relevant information from reliable sources on free software, so you only have to check one site for all your information need.

We have a large database containing articles about free software as well as many news sources.

It has never been easier to research free software your information is only a click away. Welcome!

News on free software

BBC's iPlayer verification blocks open source software
<div class="track"><img alt="" src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.20.3/45873?ns=guardian&pageName=BBC%27s+iPlayer+verification+blocks+open+source+software+%3AArticle%3A1365874&ch=Technology&c3=GU.co.uk&c4=BBC%2CiPlayer%2COpen+source+%28Technology%29%2CTechnology&c6=Jack+Schofield&c7=10-Mar-01&c8=1365874&c9=Article&c10=Blogpost&c11=Technology&c13=&c25=Technology+blog&c30=content&h2=GU%2FTechnology%2Fblog%2FTechnology+blog" width="1" height="1" /></div><p class="standfirst">The BBC seems to have started using a Flash player verification service that stops the iPlayer from streaming for more than a minute or two to unauthorised media players, hitting users of the open source XBMC</p><p>The BBC has reportedly started using the SWF Verification routine -- aimed at protecting copyright content -- with its iPlayer streaming video service. It could be an attempt to stop third-party software from downloading videos, which usually only last for seven days. However, it has the side effect of dropping the video stream after one or two minutes when used with unauthorised players. This includes <a href="http://forum.xbmc.org/showthread.php?t=51322&page=33 ">open source media players such as XBMC</a>.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/BBC-activates-iPlayer-Flash-verification-Locking-out-open-source-Update-940515.html">H-Online</a> notes that: "Some open source plug-ins get around SWF verification by transparently dropping the stream, reopening it and seeking to where it was before the 'ping' came in, though this is potentially punishing on servers."</p><p>The BBC supported Linux (OpenSuSE and Ubuntu) and Mac OS X by creating <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/install/">a desktop version of the iPlayer that uses Adobe AIR</a> (Adobe Integrated Runtime) software. Windows users can also install it.</p><p>iPlayer content reaches a wide audience not just via PCs but through the Nintendo Wii and Sony PlayStation 3 games consoles and some mobile phones. But while the BBC aspires to universal access, it doesn't guarantee to deliver all its content to everyone in the UK (DAB radio coverage being particularly limited) let alone deliver it in the format that any particular group of users may choose for their own reasons.</p><p>However, as is often the case, the BBC's move may have unforeseen consequences. <a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/02/24/iplayer_xbmc_adobe_swf_verification/">According to a report in The Register</a>:</p><blockquote><p>Reg reader, Tom Rouse, who alerted us to the SWF verification tweak to the iPlayer, wondered if the BBC was simply satisfying the demands of Adobe's content licence desires. <br />"It would seem that this move is likely [to] impact users of platforms not supported by Flash, with an unsatisfactory implementation (eg too resource intensive for the platform, with video tearing, etc.), or those who just wish to use an open source player," he said.<br />"Ironically, third party utilities that download files (which presumably the verification is there to prevent) still work fine. It is possible that this move will actually increase the occurrence of downloading files which will not be time limited, or torrenting of copyrighted material."</p></blockquote><p>A spokeswoman for the BBC Trust told <a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/03/01/no_bbc_trust_probe_iplayer_swf_verification/">The Register</a>: "The decision to block open source plugins is a matter for BBC Management. The Trust has not received any complaints on this issue and has no plans to look into it further at present." </p><p>There's no way of knowing how many UK-based iPlayer users have PCs but can't or won't run the Adobe AIR version, but it's probably not a large percentage of 61.4 million.</p><div class="related" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"><ul><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/bbc">BBC</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/iplayer">iPlayer</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/opensource">Open source</a></li></ul></div><div class="author"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/jackschofield">Jack Schofield</a></div><br/><div class="terms"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">guardian.co.uk</a> &copy; Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our <a href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html">Terms & Conditions</a> | <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/help/feeds">More Feeds</a></div><p style="clear:both" />
When using open source makes you an enemy of the state
<div class="track"><img alt="" src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.20.3/88842?ns=guardian&pageName=When+using+open+source+makes+you+an+enemy+of+the+state%3AArticle%3A1363466&ch=Technology&c3=GU.co.uk&c4=Open+source+%28Technology%29%2CIntellectual+property+%28Technology%29%2CSoftware+%28Technology%29%2CPiracy+%28Technology%29%2CFile+sharing%2CTechnology&c6=Bobbie+Johnson&c7=10-Feb-23&c8=1363466&c9=Article&c10=Blogpost&c11=Technology&c13=&c25=Technology+blog&c30=content&h2=GU%2FTechnology%2FOpen+source" width="1" height="1" /></div><p class="standfirst">The US copyright lobby has long argued against open source software - now Indonesia's in the firing line for encouraging the idea in government departments</p><p>It's only Tuesday and already it's been an interesting week for the world of digital rights. Not only did the British government <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2010/feb/23/mandelson-decide-internet-suspension">changed the wording around its controversial 'three strikes' proposals</a>, but the secretive anti-counterfeiting treaty, Acta, <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/blog/2010/feb/22/breakfast-briefing">was back in the headlines</a>. Meanwhile, a US judge is still deliberating over the <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2010/feb/17/google-books-copyright">Google book settlement</a>.</p><p>As if all that wasn't enough, here's another brick to add to the teetering tower of news, courtesy of <strong>Andres Guadamuz</strong>, a lecturer in law at the University of Edinburgh.</p><p>Guadamuz <a href="http://www.technollama.co.uk/encouraging-open-source-could-land-you-in-trouble">has done some digging</a> and discovered that an influential lobby group is asking the US government to basically consider open source as the equivalent of piracy - or even worse.</p><p>What?<br /><br />It turns out that the <a href="http://www.iipa.com/">International Intellectual Property Alliance</a>, an umbrella group for organisations including the MPAA and RIAA, has requested with the US Trade Representative to consider countries like Indonesia, Brazil and India for its "Special 301 watchlist" because they use open source software.</p><p>What's Special 301? It's a report that examines the "adequacy and effectiveness of intellectual property rights" around the planet - effectively the list of countries that the US government considers enemies of capitalism. It often gets wheeled out as a form of trading pressure - often around pharmaceuticals and counterfeited goods - to try and force governments to change their behaviours.</p><p>Now, even could argue that it's no surprise that the USTR - which is intended to encourage free market capitalism - wouldn't like free software, but really it's not quite so straightforward.</p><p>I know open source has a tendency to be linked to socialist ideals, but I also think it's an example of the free market in action. When companies can't compete with huge, crushing competitors, they route around it and find another way to reduce costs and compete. Most FOSS isn't state-owned: it just takes price elasticity to its logical conclusion and uses free as a stick to beat its competitors with (would you ever accuse Google, which gives its main product away for free, of being anti-capitalist?).</p><p>Still, in countries where the government has legislated the adoption of FOSS, the position makes some sense because it hurts businesses like Microsoft. But that's not the end of it.</p><p>No, the <em>really</em> interesting thing that Guadamuz found was that governments don't even need to pass legislation. Even a recommendation can be enough.</p><p>Example: last year the Indonesian government sent around a circular to all government departments and state-owned businesses, pushing them towards open source. This, says the IIPA, "encourages government agencies to use "FOSS" (Free Open Source Software) with a view toward implementation by the end of 2011, which the Circular states will result in the use of legitimate open source and FOSS software and a reduction in overall costs of software".</p><p>Nothing wrong with that, right? After all, the British government <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/7910110.stm">has said it will boost the use of open source software</a>. </p><p>But the IIPA suggested that Indonesia deserves Special 301 status because encouraging (not forcing) such takeup "weakens the software industry" and "fails to build respect for intellectual property rights".</p><p>From the recommendation:</p><blockquote><p>"The Indonesian government's policy... simply weakens the software industry and undermines its long-term competitiveness by creating an artificial preference for companies offering open source software and related services, even as it denies many legitimate companies access to the government market. </p><p>Rather than fostering a system that will allow users to benefit from the best solution available in the market, irrespective of the development model, it encourages a mindset that does not give due consideration to the value to intellectual creations. </p><p>As such, it fails to build respect for intellectual property rights and also limits the ability of government or public-sector customers (e.g., State-owned enterprise) to choose the best solutions.</p></blockquote><p>Let's forget that the statement ignores the fact that there are plenty of businesses built on the OSS model (RedHat, Wordpress, Canonical for starters). But beyond that, it seems astonishing to me that anyone should imply that simply recommending open source products - products that can be more easily tailored without infringing licensing rules - "undermines" anything. </p><p>In fact, IP enforcement is often <em>even more strict</em> in the open source community, and those who infringe licenses or fail to give appropriate credit are often pilloried.</p><p>If you're looking at this agog, you should be. It's ludicrous.</p><p>But the IIPA and USTR have form here: <a href="http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/3911/125/">in recent years they have put Canada on the priority watchlist</a>.</p><div class="related" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"><ul><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/opensource">Open source</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/intellectual-property">Intellectual property</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/software">Software</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/piracy">Piracy</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/file-sharing">File sharing</a></li></ul></div><div class="author"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/bobbiejohnson">Bobbie Johnson</a></div><br/><div class="terms"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">guardian.co.uk</a> &copy; Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our <a href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html">Terms & Conditions</a> | <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/help/feeds">More Feeds</a></div><p style="clear:both" />
Symbian makes its smartphone software open source
<div class="track"><img alt="" src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.20.3/53734?ns=guardian&pageName=Symbian+makes+its+smartphone+software+open+source%3AArticle%3A1355098&ch=Technology&c3=GU.co.uk&c4=Mobile+phones+%28Technology%29%2COpen+source+%28Technology%29%2CSoftware+%28Technology%29%2CNokia+%28Technology%29%2CGoogle+%28Technology%29%2CApple+%28Technology%29%2CAndroid+%28technology%29%2CBlackBerry+%28Technology%29%2CMicrosoft+%28Technology%29%2CTelecommunications+industry+%28Business+sector%29%2CNokia+%28Business%29&c6=Richard+Wray&c7=10-Feb-04&c8=1355098&c9=Article&c10=News&c11=Technology&c13=&c25=&c30=content&h2=GU%2FTechnology%2FMobile+phones" width="1" height="1" /></div><p class="standfirst">Mobile phone operating system can now be modified by anyone as Nokia's platform struggles to compete with Apple and Google</p><p></p><p>Symbian, the operating system used in the majority of the world's smartphones, is now available as an open source platform four months ahead of schedule as it looks to compete with Apple and Google's Android.</p><p>In a move widely seen as a desperate attempt to prevent Google and Apple from grabbing an ever-larger slice of the smartphone pie, <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2008/jun/25/nokia.google" title="Nokia took control ofUK-based Symbian in the summer of 2008">Nokia took control of the UK-based Symbian in the summer of 2008</a>, announcing plans to make its mobile phone software free of charge.</p><p>Nokia helped create Symbian with the UK-based Psion more than a decade ago and it is installed in some 330m mobile phones across the world. But its share of the smartphone market has come under attack. Two years ago, Symbian devices accounted for almost 60% of the market, but now account for less than 50%. Industry experts Ovum reckon that figure will fall to below a third by 2015, in part because of the influence of Android, which is also open source.</p><p>The Symbian Foundation, which runs the platform, said the switch from a paid-for proprietary model, where developers had to pay a licence fee to create devices using the software, to a free open source model is the largest in software history.</p><p>Any individual or organization can now take, use and modify the code for any purpose, whether for a mobile device or another piece of kit.</p><p>Lee Williams, executive director of the Symbian Foundation, said: "The development community is now empowered to shape the future of the mobile industry, and rapid innovation on a global scale will be the result.</p><p>"When the Symbian Foundation was created, we set the target of completing the open source release of the platform by mid-2010 and it's because of the extraordinary commitment and dedication from our staff and our member companies that we've reached it well ahead of schedule."</p><p>The hope is that allowing any developer to use Symbian will speed up the development of new and innovative devices, which will help the platform to see off the threat of Apple and Android.</p><p>But it is competing in an increasingly crowded market. Handset manufacturers from LG and Samsung to Sony Ericsson have their own proprietary operating systems, as do RIM, maker of the BlackBerry, Palm and Apple. Microsoft is still trying to gain traction for its Windows phone operating system, while a slew of handsets with Android installed will be launched this year.</p><p>All 108 packages containing the source code of the Symbian platform can now be downloaded from Symbian's <a href="tiny.symbian.org/open" title="developer web site">developer website</a> under a public licence. Also available for download are the complete development kits for creating applications and mobile devices.</p><div class="related" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"><ul><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/mobilephones">Mobile phones</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/opensource">Open source</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/software">Software</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/nokia">Nokia</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/google">Google</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/apple">Apple</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/android">Android</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/blackberry">BlackBerry</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/microsoft/">Microsoft</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/telecoms">Telecommunications industry</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/nokia">Nokia</a></li></ul></div><div class="author"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/richardwray">Richard Wray</a></div><br/><div class="terms"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">guardian.co.uk</a> &copy; Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our <a href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html">Terms & Conditions</a> | <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/help/feeds">More Feeds</a></div><p style="clear:both" />
Meet the Wikipedia of the mapping world | Victor Keegan
<div class="track"><img alt="" src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.20.3/70351?ns=guardian&pageName=Meet+the+Wikipedia+of+the+mapping+world+%7C+Victor+Keegan%3AArticle%3A1354715&ch=Technology&c3=GU.co.uk&c4=Internet%2CTechnology%2COpen+source+%28Technology%29%2CGoogle+%28Technology%29%2CGPS+%28Technology%29%2CHaiti+%28News%29&c6=Victor+Keegan&c7=10-Feb-10&c8=1354715&c9=Article&c10=Comment&c11=Technology&c13=&c25=&c30=content&h2=GU%2FTechnology%2FInternet" width="1" height="1" /></div><p class="standfirst">Thanks to its team of volunteers, OpenStreetMap has now mapped most of the world ? including Haiti</p><p>If you want to find an up-to-date map of Haiti, then there is only one place to go. It is not Google Maps or any of its competitors. It is the admirable <a href="http://www.openstreetmap.org/" title="OpenStreetMap.org">OpenStreetMap.org</a> (OSM), which is being updated even as I write by volunteers all over the world.</p><p>It is the Wikipedia of the mapping world, and is used by millions of people. Started a little over five years ago in London by Steve Coast, it has steadily built up its database to the point where most of the world has now been mapped by a formidable team of volunteers which is doubling every six months: there were 212,000 at the last count, of whom 10% are active during any one month. At the end of January there were 239 people rebuilding the map of Haiti. For a bird's eye view of operations, go to the <a href="http://haiti.ushahidi.com/main" title="Ushahidi">Ushahidi</a> site.</p><p>When the earthquake happened it was a signal for OSM members around the globe to start downloading satellite images (either freely available or donated by Yahoo) and then to start tracing the outlines of streets on top <a href="http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Haiti" title="so a map emerged">so a map emerged</a>. Volunteers on the ground in Haiti, often using Garmin GPS locators, added vital local information ? such as which roads were passable, where the hospitals were situated, where refugee camps were, or walls, pharmacies, hedges and so forth ? so rescue workers had an invaluable tool. The result is a new, detailed map that is updated frequently, unlike most commercial maps.</p><p>This is only one of a number of open projects operating in Haiti in what may come to be seen as a seminal moment in the harnessing of the web to help those in need. Others include <a href="http://crisiscommons.org/" title="CrisisCommons">CrisisCommons</a>, <a href="http://www.wehaveweneed.org/" title="WeHaveNeed">WeHaveNeed</a>, <a href="http://haiti-orgs.sahanafoundation.org/prod/" title="Sahana">Sahana</a>, <a href="http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=5685" title="open source medical">open source medical software</a> and numerous others, not to mention Twitter tags such as #haiti. One of the problems of using appropriate technology in disaster regions is that bricklayers in Haiti don't know of innovations that might have been pioneered in remote parts of Africa, a problem that <a href="http://www.akvo.org/" title="Akvo">Akvo</a> is trying to solve with regard to water. There are also signs that <a href="http://hexayurt.com/" title="Hexayurt">Hexayurt</a> low-cost housing projects are starting to seed in Haiti.</p><p>OpenStreetMaps is itself at a turning point as it tries to progress from a techie-driven project to one that the ordinary consumer can not only understand but contribute to as well. It suffers from what might be dubbed "open source syndrome", a complaint that also affects other OS projects including the Linux operating system ? the involvement of skilled volunteers can make the early stages a bit difficult to understand for laypeople.</p><p>However, they have been working on it and it is now much easier to do. A few days ago I added my local curry house to the map (next to a post box someone else had already inserted). All I needed to do was to drag a symbol of a restaurant from the bottom of the screen to where I wanted to put it and then add the words "Indian Diner". That in a nutshell is the comparative advantage that OpenStreetMap claims over other online maps. Users can add whatever detail interests them such as <a href="http://www.opencyclemap.org/" title="cycle routes">cycle routes</a>, skateboarding areas, cycle parks, paths through parks ? the parts Google can't reach. You have to register (it's free) as a member to alter the map. There is an iPhone app, Mapzen, produced by <a href="http://cloudmade.com/" title="Cloudmade">Cloudmade</a> (company founded by Coast and Nick Black to exploit mapping opportunities) that enables you to insert places of interest you have found on the move. If that takes off, it could lift the project to a new level.</p><p>Often volunteers create maps where there was nothing before as in <a href="http://www.mapkibera.org/" title="Kibera">Kibera</a> in Kenya where basic amenities such as drinking water sources and latrines as well as churches are located to improve living standards and combat illness (eg, where latrines are located too near water sources). The Kibera team have been asked by Ushahidi and Google to include mapping of the slums of Port-au-Prince as part of the relief effort, something that hasn't been done before.</p><p>Gordon Brown, the UK prime minister, has just rediscovered cooperativism as a way of galvanising people to vote Labour. He would have been much more in tune with the times if he had widened it to include the open source movement in all its different aspects. It is one of the most interesting phenomena of our times, a kind of global mutual society. While the likes of Apple and Amazon, though producing fantastic products, are becoming ever more controlling and proprietary, it is sobering to be reminded that one of the basic instincts of human nature ? mutual cooperation for no cost ? is thriving on a global scale.</p><p><a href="http://twitter.com/vickeegan" title="Folllow Vic Keegan on Twitter"><em>Follow Vic Keegan on Twitter</em></a></p><div class="related" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"><ul><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/internet">Internet</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/opensource">Open source</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/google">Google</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/gps">GPS</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/haiti">Haiti</a></li></ul></div><div class="author"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/victorkeegan">Victor Keegan</a></div><br/><div class="terms"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">guardian.co.uk</a> &copy; Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our <a href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html">Terms & Conditions</a> | <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/help/feeds">More Feeds</a></div><p style="clear:both" />
Breakfast briefing: YouTube's rental experiment, Facebook goes HipHop
<div class="track"><img alt="" src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.20.3/53142?ns=guardian&pageName=Breakfast+briefing%3A+YouTube%27s+rental+experiment%2C+Facebook+goes+HipHop%3AArticle%3A1346201&ch=Technology&c3=GU.co.uk&c4=YouTube+%28Technology%29%2CDigital+video+%28Technology%29%2CFacebook%2COpen+source+%28Technology%29%2CProgramming+%28Technology%29%2CTechnology&c6=Bobbie+Johnson&c7=10-Feb-03&c8=1346201&c9=Article&c10=Blogpost&c11=Technology&c13=&c25=Technology+blog&c30=content&h2=GU%2FTechnology%2FYouTube" width="1" height="1" /></div><p>&bull; There's been plenty of talk in recent years about <strong>YouTube</strong> - more specifically <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/blog/2009/apr/07/youtube-video-losses">whether it makes money</a>, deals with <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/nov/08/youtube-film-technology-business">movie studios</a> and potential entry into video rentals. That last idea may be on ice, after figures that suggest that the company <a href="http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/02/02/youtubes-take-from-movie-rentals-1070916/">made little more than $10,000</a> during a short experiment in movie rentals. Not exactly chump change (if you can spare $10k, let me know) but certainly a long way from where Google would have wanted it.</p><p>&bull; <strong>Facebook</strong> has been doing more work with the open source community of late, but its latest effort sounds pretty interesting: <a href="http://developers.facebook.com/news.php?blog=1&story=358">HipHop</a>, a PHP compiler that it says reduces CPU load by an average of 50% (at least for Facebook itself). Actually, it's not really a compiler, but a system that converts PHP into C++ and <em>then</em> compiles it... will it make a real difference to web developers? Or will it only really make a difference to Facebook-style operations?</p><p>&bull; And it's time for another episode of our <strong>Tech Weekly</strong> - and apologies to anyone who is iPadded out, but we couldn't ignore the Apple - so we drag along Nick Carr to help us ponder what it all means. We also hear from a top-ranking literary agent <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/feb/01/amazon-defeat-macmillan-ebook-row">on Amazon's tussle with Macmillan</a>. Thirty-three minutes of aural excitement <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/blog/audio/2010/feb/02/tech-weekly-ipad-amazon-ebook">at the click of a button</a>.</p><p><em>You can follow our links and commentary each day through Twitter (<a href="http://www.twitter.com/guardiantech">@guardiantech</a>, or our <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/page/2007/dec/10/1">personal accounts</a>) or by watching our <a href="http://delicious.com/guardianista">Delicious feed</a>.</em></p><div class="related" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"><ul><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/youtube">YouTube</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/digitalvideo">Digital video</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/facebook">Facebook</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/opensource">Open source</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/programming">Programming</a></li></ul></div><div class="author"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/bobbiejohnson">Bobbie Johnson</a></div><br/><div class="terms"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">guardian.co.uk</a> &copy; Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our <a href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html">Terms & Conditions</a> | <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/help/feeds">More Feeds</a></div><p style="clear:both" />
Apple iPad will choke innovation, say open internet advocates
<div class="track"><img alt="" src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.20.3/83778?ns=guardian&pageName=Apple+iPad+will+choke+innovation%2C+say+open+internet+advocates%3AArticle%3A1344202&ch=Technology&c3=GU.co.uk&c4=Apple+%28Technology%29%2CTablet+computers%2COpen+source+%28Technology%29%2CDRM+%28Technology%29%2CIntellectual+property+%28Technology%29%2CSoftware+%28Technology%29%2CTechnology%2CiPad&c6=Bobbie+Johnson&c7=10-Feb-01&c8=1344202&c9=Article&c10=News&c11=Technology&c13=&c25=&c30=content&h2=GU%2FTechnology%2FApple" width="1" height="1" /></div><p class="standfirst">The Apple iPad's closed, iPhone-like environment could shut out the next computing revolution, say industry veterans</p><p>Apple's new iPad tablet computer could hamper innovation and cause long-term damage if it becomes a hit, according to experts.</p><p>Just as Steve Jobs tries to wow the world with the "magical" new device - unveiled on Wednesday <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2010/jan/27/apple-ipad-tablet-computer-kindle" title="at a media-saturated launch event in San Francisco">at a media-saturated launch event in San Francisco</a> ? leading industry figures have told the Guardian that the machine marks a fundamental shift in the way the computer industry works.</p><p>The iPad, a 10-inch touchscreen computer that will cost upwards of £300, was greeted by many admirers as a significant step forward. But in developing it using the closed model of the iPhone, industry insiders said, Apple could wrestle even more power away from its rivals and partners.</p><p>"It's chilling," said Brewster Kahle, a technology veteran and director of the <a href="http://www.archive.org" title="Internet Archive">Internet Archive</a>. "We may be seeing the iPhone-ification of the Macintosh."</p><p>The concerns come because ? contrary to the predictions of many pundits ? the iPad is more like a scaled-up version of the iPhone than a scaled-down laptop computer. That means it can only run one program at a time, and even then those applications must be approved by Apple before they can be loaded on to the machine. This is the opposite of the traditional model used by the computer industry, where the makers of operating systems have little or no control over what software their users buy or download.</p><p>Kahle told the Guardian that such a lockdown would prevent major innovation from software developers.</p><p>"They really control the horizontal and the vertical by going with the iPhone platform... I think it's discouraging," he said. "The future is controlled, and it's controlled by Apple."</p><p>Referring to some major innovations like web browsers, email and instant messaging, he added that Apple could easily block in favour of developing a competing product or simply limiting new ideas.</p><p>"All of those started out as independent applications by independent organisations that were not in the plan of any of the platform makers," he said. "If you were to come up with these now on the iPhone, you couldn't even get out of the starting gate."</p><p>Kahle, whose organisation is trying to assemble a vast library of digital assets for access by the public, is not the only person concerned that the move to what Harvard professor Jonathan Zittrain calls "<a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/may/01/internet.gadgets" title="tethered appliances">tethered appliances</a>" could have long-lasting effects on modern culture.</p><p>The Free Software Foundation staged a protest at the launch event and argued that the iPad could set a precedent that would fundamentally change the way we related to technology.</p><p>"This past year, we have seen how human rights and democracy protesters can have the technology they use turned against them by the corporations who supply the products and services they rely on," said Peter Brown, executive director of the FSF.</p><p>"Your computer should be yours to control. By imposing such restrictions on users, Steve Jobs is building a legacy that endangers our freedom for his profits."</p><p>Apple has previously come in for criticism for its seemingly arbitrary approval policy for applications submitted for use on the iPhone ? a system that has seen <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/blog/2009/may/21/apple-iphone" title="some applications banned from going on sale for containing "sexual content"">some applications banned from going on sale for containing "sexual content"</a>, while allowing others get through.</p><p>Last summer, <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2009/aug/22/google-apple-iphone" title="Google accused its Silicon Valley neighbour">Google accused its Silicon Valley neighbour</a> of unfairly blocking rival companies from putting their software on the iPhone, a claim that led to an investigation by US regulators.</p><p>Kahle, who oversees <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2009/jul/01/internet-open-library" title="the OpenLibrary project">the OpenLibrary project</a> that aims to put millions of books online, also said that he hoped Apple's iTunes model would not become as dominant as it has in the music world ? and that the company would open up the system to benefit everyone.</p><p>"Apple is going towards having a single store and aggregating everyone into that store. That is not the web, that is a pre-web world. We think that you not only want interesting applications that weren't predicted and weren't previously approved by Apple, but you want people to be able to set up and sell and lend books. Does this do that? I see no indications yet."</p><div class="related" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"><ul><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/apple">Apple</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/tablet-computer">Tablet computers</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/opensource">Open source</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/drm">Digital rights management</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/intellectual-property">Intellectual property</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/software">Software</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/ipad">iPad</a></li></ul></div><div class="author"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/bobbiejohnson">Bobbie Johnson</a></div><br/><div class="terms"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">guardian.co.uk</a> &copy; Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our <a href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html">Terms & Conditions</a> | <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/help/feeds">More Feeds</a></div><p style="clear:both" />
Breakfast briefing: Apple ramps up, Sun boss steps down - and why open source isn't open to millions
<div class="track"><img alt="" src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.20.3/45972?ns=guardian&pageName=Breakfast+briefing%3A+Apple+ramps+up%2C+Sun+boss+steps+down+-+and+why+open+s%3AArticle%3A1342487&ch=Technology&c3=GU.co.uk&c4=Apple+%28Technology%29%2CSun+Microsystems+%28Technology%29%2COpen+source+%28Technology%29%2CTechnology&c6=Bobbie+Johnson&c7=10-Jan-27&c8=1342487&c9=Article&c10=Blogpost&c11=Technology&c13=&c25=Technology+blog&c30=content&h2=GU%2FTechnology%2FApple" width="1" height="1" /></div><p>&bull; Not long to go now until the <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2010/jan/26/apple-product-launch-islate-tablet">Great Applegasm of 2010</a> takes place - with the anticipation level so high that whatever is revealed will now prove a disappointment unless it saves the media industry/revolutionises our lives/heals the sick. Still, though, there were fun and games on Tuesday when <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/blog/2010/jan/26/apple-tablet-mcgraw">a publishing executive let slip some details of the device</a>. A controlled leak? Possibly, but to do so in this way is very untypical of Apple. Whatever the case, we'll be liveblogging the event from around 5pm - I'll be at the launch venue, the Yerba Buena Center in San Francisco, while Charles will be following the news from London.</p><p>&bull; Further to <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/blog/2010/jan/26/breakfast-briefing">rumours of Jonathan Schwartz's impending departure</a> from <strong>Sun Microsystems</strong>, the company's co-founder and chairman Scott McNealy said his own farewell <a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-30685_3-20000017-264.html">in a memo to staff yesterday</a>. There's plenty of gooey farewell to the employees, but also a fair level of candour: "To be honest, this is not a note this founder wants to write," he says, adding that "we did not monetize our inventions as well as we could have" and praising Oracle founder Larry Ellison (Sun's acquirer) as "one of the greatest capitalists I've ever met". </p><p>&bull; And when is open source not open source? When you live in a repressive country, apparently. Online code repository <a href="http://www.sourceforge.net">SourceForge</a>, which is based in California, has <a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/01/26/sourceforge_ip_address_filtering/">started blocking users in countries such as Iran, North Korea, Cuba, Sudan and Syria</a> because they live in places subject to US government sanctions. Unsurprisingly given the underlying tenets of the free software movement, it's caused consternation - but while the site itself says <a href="http://sourceforge.net/blog/clarifying-sourceforgenets-denial-of-site-access-for-certain-persons-in-accordance-with-us-law/">"restrictions on the free flow of information rub us the wrong way"</a> it also says it has little choice, given US law.</p><p><em>You can follow our links and commentary each day through Twitter (<a href="http://www.twitter.com/guardiantech">@guardiantech</a>, or our <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/page/2007/dec/10/1">personal accounts</a>) or by watching our <a href="http://delicious.com/guardianista">Delicious feed</a>.</em><br /></p><div class="related" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"><ul><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/apple">Apple</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/sun-microsystems">Sun Microsystems</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/opensource">Open source</a></li></ul></div><div class="author"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/bobbiejohnson">Bobbie Johnson</a></div><br/><div class="terms"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">guardian.co.uk</a> &copy; Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our <a href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html">Terms & Conditions</a> | <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/help/feeds">More Feeds</a></div><p style="clear:both" />
YouTube's video choice prompts Firefox fightback
<div class="track"><img alt="" src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.20.3/70518?ns=guardian&pageName=YouTube%27s+video+choice+prompts+Firefox+fightback%3AArticle%3A1341575&ch=Technology&c3=GU.co.uk&c4=Open+source+%28Technology%29%2CGoogle+%28Technology%29%2CYouTube+%28Technology%29%2CDigital+media%2CTechnology&c6=Jack+Schofield&c7=10-Jan-25&c8=1341575&c9=Article&c10=Blogpost&c11=Technology&c13=&c25=Technology+blog&c30=content&h2=GU%2FTechnology%2Fblog%2FTechnology+blog" width="1" height="1" /></div><p class="standfirst">Firefox isn't supporting the H.264 video standard because it's patented and the patent owners want fees: it's not free. But if Google and YouTube make it ubiquitous, will users have a real choice? Should they care?</p><p>YouTube has recently announced an experimental <a href="http://www.youtube.com/html5">HTML5 player</a> that uses the H.264 codec for video instead of a format based on Adobe Flash. You might think that would be applauded as a move towards open standards, but as I noted briefly <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/blog/2010/jan/22/youtube-playlist-discovery-sundance-rental">last week</a>, the new system works with Google Chrome and Apple Safari browsers, but not Mozilla's Firefox. It doesn't support H.264.</p><p>This is a critical issue for Mozilla, because it risks losing market share. If users find they can play YouTube videos using Chrome or Safari but they won't play in Firefox, some users are going to switch browsers.<br /><br />Mozilla's problem is that H.264 is encumbered by patents: it's not a royalty-free format. And according to Robert O'Callahan in a Saturday blog post on <a href="http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/roc/archives/2010/01/video_freedom_a.html">Video, Freedom And Mozilla</a> (with the rider that it's "nothing but my own opinion as a developer of video-related Mozilla code!"), licensing the patents "would violate principles of free software that we strongly believe in." He says:</p><blockquote><p>"<strong>Users just want video to work. You Mozilla people are such idealists!</strong> Yes, that is the reason for Mozilla to exist. Anyway, in the short term, our users probably won't be affected much since Flash fallback will still work. In the long term, I think freedom will ultimately benefit users (not just Firefox users, but all users)."</p></blockquote><p>The same day, Mike Shaver, Mozilla's vice president of engineering, explained why Mozilla doesn't license the H.264 codec, and <a href="http://shaver.off.net/diary/2010/01/23/html5-video-and-codecs/">his post</a> included the following:</p><blockquote><p>"Mozilla has decided differently, in part because there is no apparent means for us to license H.264 under terms that would cover other users of our technology, such as Linux distributors, or people in affiliated projects like Wikimedia or the Participatory Culture Foundation. Even if we were to pay the $5,000,000 annual licensing cost for H.264, and we were to not care about the spectre of license fees for internet distribution of encoded content, or about content and tool creators, downstream projects would be no better off."</p></blockquote><p>As Shaver points out, that kind of fee would have made the success of the web impossible. Mozilla would never have got going if it had had to pay $5m or so to use HTML, CSS, JavaScript and similar technologies.</p><p>The web has had to cope with patented technologies before. The main examples are the GIF image file format and the MP3 music file format, both of which became ubiquitous. These were discussed by Christopher Blizzard, Mozilla's Open Source Evangelist, in a long post: <a href="http://www.0xdeadbeef.com/weblog/2010/01/html5-video-and-h-264-what-history-tells-us-and-why-were-standing-with-the-web/">HTML5 video and H.264 ? what history tells us and why we're standing with the web</a>.</p><p>After GIF became popular, Blizzard says "Unisys was asking some web site owners $5,000-$7,500 to able to use GIFs on their sites." He says: "We're looking at the same situation with H.264, except at a far larger scale."</p><p>MP3 was also liberally licensed in its early days (indeed, many people thought it was unlicensed), but again, there was an effort to monetise it as it became ubiquitous. Today, says Blizzard:</p><blockquote><p>"If you look at the public published rates for a couple of the MP3 licensors (and there are more than just two) someone who wanted to use it would be looking at a royalty rate of about $1/downloaded unit. So if you were doing, say, two million downloads a day you would be looking at about $2,000,000 per day just to have permission from those companies to include an MP3 decoder. Could you negotiate a lower rate? Probably. But that gives you a sense of the scale if you're a small provider in a world where getting started on the web is hard and you don't have much negotiating power."</p></blockquote><p>It looks as though H.264 is developing in a similar way. And the more widespread it becomes, the more power the patent-owners will have to extract money from suppliers who use it. </p><p>Free software and open source supporters will, of course, say that all this is unnecessary: YouTube should simply use the Ogg/Theora codec that offers comparable quality to H.264 (it might be worse, but not a lot worse). And as user Underhill comments on O'Callahan's post: "there is a pretty huge practical difference between 'Someone might have patents on Theora that we don't know about, and might sue' and 'MPEG-LA has patents on H.264 and *will* sue'."</p><p>There's a petition to get YouTube to support Ogg/Theora at <br /><a href="http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/oggandyoutube/">http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/oggandyoutube/</a></p><p>Because Google dominates the web, and YouTube dominates web video, it looks as though the decision to use H.264 will mean we all end up using it whether we like it or not. That might not be the case. Blizzard says:</p><blockquote><p>"I, like many others, have reason to believe that H.264 will not be Google's final choice. There's good reason to believe this: they are purchasing On2. On2 has technologies that are supposed to be better than H.264. If Google owns the rights to those technologies they are very likely to use them on their properties to promote them and are also likely to license them in a web-friendly (ie royalty-free) fashion. Google actually has a decent history of doing this."</p></blockquote><p>Web video has never really been open, unencumbered and free. We've had Real Networks RM format, Apple's QuickTime, Microsoft's Windows Media Video (now standardised as VC-1), the DivX and XviD codecs, and Adobe Flash among others. There might never be one open standard, simply because some content owners will want to include DRM (Digital Rights Management) copy restrictions. </p><p>However, the web would benefit from having an open, unencumbered and free video format that enabled HTML programmers to include a video as easily as they now include a headline or a photo, wouldn't it? How do we get to that?</p><div class="related" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"><ul><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/opensource">Open source</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/google">Google</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/youtube">YouTube</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/digital-media">Digital media</a></li></ul></div><div class="author"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/jackschofield">Jack Schofield</a></div><br/><div class="terms"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">guardian.co.uk</a> &copy; Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our <a href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html">Terms & Conditions</a> | <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/help/feeds">More Feeds</a></div><p style="clear:both" />
The BBC's digital rights plans will wreak havoc on open source software | Cory Doctorow
<div class="track"><img alt="" src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.20.3/91540?ns=guardian&pageName=The+BBC%27s+digital+rights+plans+will+wreak+havoc+on+open+source+software+%3AArticle%3A1321837&ch=Technology&c3=GU.co.uk&c4=Technology%2CDRM+%28Technology%29%2CBBC%2CSoftware+%28Technology%29%2COpen+source+%28Technology%29%2CTelevision+%28Technology%29%2CTelevision+industry+%28Media%29&c6=Cory+Doctorow&c7=09-Dec-22&c8=1321837&c9=Article&c10=Comment&c11=Technology&c13=Digital+rights-+digital+wrongs&c25=&c30=content&h2=GU%2FTechnology%2FDigital+rights+management" width="1" height="1" /></div><p class="standfirst">The BBC is trying to dictate what kinds of televisions and set-top boxes we use to watch its programmes</p><p>Last summer, the BBC tried to sneak "digital rights management" into its high-def digital broadcasts.</p><p>Now, generally speaking, the BBC isn't allowed to encrypt or restrict its broadcasts: the licence fee payer pays for these broadcasts, and no licence fee payer woke up today wishing that the BBC had added restrictions to its programming.</p><p>But the BBC tried to get around this, asking Ofcom for permission to encrypt the "metadata" on its broadcasts ? including the assistive information used by deaf and blind people and the "tables" used by receivers to play back the video. The BBC couched this as a minor technical change, and Ofcom held a very short, very quiet consultation, but was overwhelmed by a flood of negative submissions from the public and from technologists who understood the implications of this move.</p><p>Fundamentally, the BBC is trying to leverage its broadcast licence into control over the devices that can receive broadcasts. That is, in addition to deciding what shows to put on the air, the Beeb wants the power to decide what kinds of tellies and set-top boxes will be able to display and record those shows ? and it wants the power to control the design of all the devices that might be plugged into a TV or set-top box. This is an unprecedented amount of power for a broadcaster to have.</p><p>As Ofcom gears up to a second consultation the issue, there's one important question that the BBC <em>must</em> answer if the implications of this move are to be fully explored, namely: <em>How can free/open source software co-exist with a plan to put DRM on broadcasts?</em></p><p>A brief backgrounder on how this system is meant to work: the BBC will encrypt a small, critical piece of the signal. To get a key to decrypt the scrambled data, you will need to sign onto an agreement governed by a consortium called the Digital Transmission Licensing Administrator (some of the agreement is public, but other parts are themselves under seal of confidentiality, which means that the public literally isn't allowed to know all the terms under which BBC signals will be licensed).</p><p>DTLA licenses a wide variety of devices to move, display, record, and make limited copies of video. Which programmes can be recorded, how many copies, how long recordings can last and other restrictions are set within the system. To receive a licence, manufacturers must promise to honour these restrictions. Manufacturers also must promise to design their devices so that they will not pass video onto unapproved or unlicenced devices ? only DTLA-approved boxes can touch or manipulate or play the video.</p><p>DTLA enforces these rules through a system of penalties for non-compliant vendors. It also has the power to "revoke" devices after they are sold to you, so that the BBC's signals will refuse to play on your set-top box if the DTLA determines that its security is inadequate and they pass it a revocation message (even though you always used your box in accordance with the law).</p><p>With DTLA devices, the integrity and usefulness of your home theatre is subject to the ongoing approval of the consortium, and they can switch it off if they decide, at any time in the future, that they don't trust it any more.</p><p>The entire DTLA system relies on the keys necessary to authenticate devices and unscramble video being kept secret, and on the rules governing the use of keys being inviolable. To that end, the DTLA "Compliance and Robustness Agreement" (presented as "Annex C" to the DTLA agreement) has a number of requirements aimed at ensuring that every DTLA-approved device is armoured against user modification. Keys must be hidden. Steps must be taken to ensure that the code running on the device isn't modified. Failure to take adequate protection against user modification will result in DTLA approval being withheld or revoked.</p><p>This is where the conflict with free/open source software arises.</p><p>Free/open source software, such as the GNU/Linux operating system that runs many set-top boxes, is created cooperatively among many programmers (thousands, in some cases). Unlike proprietary software, such as the Windows operating system or the iPhone's operating system, free software authors publish their code and allow any other programmer to examine it, make improvements to it, and publish those improvements. This has proven to be a powerful means of quickly building profitable new businesses and devices, from the TomTomGo GPSes to Google's Android phones to the Humax Freeview box you can buy tonight at Argos for around £130.</p><p>Because it can be adapted by anyone, free software is an incredible source of innovative new ideas. Because it can be used without charge, it has allowed unparalleled competition, dramatically lowering the cost of entering electronics markets. In short, free software is good for business, it's good for the public, it's good for progress, and it's good for competition.</p><p>But free software is bad for DTLA compliance.</p><p>Free software is <em>intended</em> to be examined and modified by all comers.</p><p>Generally, the licence terms for free software <em>require</em> that it is licensed for public examination and adaptation. It is literally impossible for a device to be both "open" and for it to prevent its users from retrieving keys hidden in its guts, or from changing the code that runs on it. This, of course, is totally incompatible with the DTLA requirement to hide keys and prevent modification of code.</p><p>And so, when the BBC threatens to infect its high-def broadcasts with DTLA, it also threatens to remove free/open software from consideration for any device that can play, record, or manipulate the video that the licence fee pays for. It means that you can't use a GNU/Linux phone to watch a show, or an open video player like VLC on your laptop. It means that your kids can't use free/open video-editing software to cut some of last night's news into a presentation for class.</p><p>It means that British entrants into the DTV device market can't avail themselves of the free software that their competitors all over the world are using, and will have to spend fortunes reinventing the wheel, creating operating systems and programs that do the same things as their free counterparts, but in such a way as to enforce restrictions against the device's owner.</p><p>Ofcom is meant to guard the public interest in matters such as these. If the public interest is to be upheld here, the BBC <em>must</em> explain how it intends to do the impossible: add DRM without banning free/open source development.</p><div class="related" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"><ul><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/drm">Digital rights management</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/bbc">BBC</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/software">Software</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/opensource">Open source</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/television">Television</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/television">Television industry</a></li></ul></div><div class="author"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/corydoctorow">Cory Doctorow</a></div><br/><div class="terms"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">guardian.co.uk</a> &copy; Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our <a href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html">Terms & Conditions</a> | <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/help/feeds">More Feeds</a></div><p style="clear:both" />
Breakfast briefing: Twitter cashes in, Google opens up
<div class="track"><img alt="" src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.20.3/40813?ns=guardian&pageName=Breakfast+briefing%3A+Twitter+cashes+in%2C+Google+opens+up%3AArticle%3A1322050&ch=Technology&c3=GU.co.uk&c4=Twitter+%28Technology%29%2CGoogle+%28Technology%29%2COpen+source+%28Technology%29%2CTechnology&c6=Bobbie+Johnson&c7=09-Dec-22&c8=1322050&c9=Article&c10=Blogpost&c11=Technology&c13=&c25=Technology+blog&c30=content&h2=GU%2FTechnology%2FTwitter" width="1" height="1" /></div><p>&bull; The headline news this morning is that <strong>Twitter</strong> - yes, Twitter - is profitable. What? Well, while it has often seemed that the startup du jour was operating with a business plan cribbed from the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gnomes_plan.png">underpant gnomes</a>, it seems that its <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=a1jwVtGQmErk">recent deals with Microsoft and Google have netted income of a reported $25m</a>. Tasty, though I suspect it's still a long way from justifying the $150m+ investment pumped into the company.</p><p>&bull; It's hard to move these days without bumping into somebody spouting "open" as their favourite buzzword. Open source. Open platforms. Open standards. Open bars. (Well, the last one doesn't happen as often as I'd like, but I can still hope). The one thing I know whenever a big company says it believes in "being open" is to try and find out exactly what it thinks that means. That's <strong>Google</strong> appears to be considering that question as it sees it. In a <a href="http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2009/12/meaning-of-open.html">long and rather dense blog post</a>, senior executive Jonathan Rosenberg outlines what "the meaning of open" is at Googleplex. The company's motivation is "not altruistic" he admits - and glosses over the more secretive aspects of its activities - but he suggests that open source, open standards and open internet access are all vital for its future.</p><p>&bull; And if that was a bit heavy, here's something to much about with while the office is quiet. If you play online games at all, you've probably tried your hand at one basketball simulation or another - but <a href="http://www.onlinegames.com/basketball/">this basketball game takes things further</a> by adding a multiplayer element. It updates after each shot to show you how you compare to other players around the world. That turns a brief dalliance into something very addictive.</p><p><em>You can follow our links and commentary each day through Twitter (<a href="http://www.twitter.com/guardiantech">@guardiantech</a>, or our <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/page/2007/dec/10/1">personal accounts</a>) or by watching our <a href="http://delicious.com/guardianista">Delicious feed</a>.</em></p><div class="related" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"><ul><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/twitter">Twitter</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/google">Google</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/opensource">Open source</a></li></ul></div><div class="author"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/bobbiejohnson">Bobbie Johnson</a></div><br/><div class="terms"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">guardian.co.uk</a> &copy; Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our <a href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html">Terms & Conditions</a> | <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/help/feeds">More Feeds</a></div><p style="clear:both" />
Breakfast briefing: Dark matters for physicists, but a burst of light for BlackBerry
<div class="track"><img alt="" src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.20.3/62869?ns=guardian&pageName=Breakfast+briefing%3A+Dark+matters+for+physicists%2C+but+a+burst+of+light+fo%3AArticle%3A1320721&ch=Technology&c3=GU.co.uk&c4=Science%2CBlackBerry+%28Technology%29%2CMobile+phones+%28Technology%29%2CiPhone%2CWindows+%28Technology%29%2CMicrosoft+%28Technology%29%2COpen+source+%28Technology%29%2CSoftware+%28Technology%29%2CComputing+%28Technology%29%2CTechnology&c6=Bobbie+Johnson&c7=09-Dec-18&c8=1320721&c9=Article&c10=Blogpost&c11=Technology&c13=&c25=Technology+blog&c30=content&h2=GU%2FTechnology%2Fblog%2FTechnology+blog" width="1" height="1" /></div><p>&bull; How could we ignore the news that scientists believe they may have - finally - detected <strong>dark matter</strong>? We couldn't. The <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2009/dec/17/dark-matter-detected">announcement yesterday</a> possibly marks the end of nearly 80 years of searching to find the material which, we're told, keeps the universe glued together. I'm rubbing my hands together in glee at the prospects for a sudden burst of development in physics. Surely teleportation can only be a few years away now.</p><p>&bull; Canada's BlackBerry-making <strong>Research in Motion</strong> surprised quite a few people when it announced a <a href="http://finance.yahoo.com/news/RIM-profit-outlook-top-rb-245328418.html?x=0">surge in profits for the past quarter</a>, on the back of more than 10m handsets sold around the globe. And according to ComScore, the BlackBerry continues to <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/17/comscore-iphone-overtakes-windows-mobile-use-for-the-first-time/">extend its lead in mobile phone web browsing</a> - with the iPhone now creeping up to a point where it has now overtaken Windows Mobile.</p><p>&bull; <strong>Mark Shuttleworth</strong>, the open source pioneer who is a driving force behind the popular Linux OS Ubuntu <a href="http://blogs.computerworld.com/15275/shuttleworth_steps_down_as_ubuntu_ceo">announced yesterday that he was stepping down as CEO of his company, Canonical</a>. He still plans on being heavily involved in the Ubuntu community, but didn't really give a solid explanation on why he's stepping back now. For more insight, check out an <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/may/22/internet.software">interview we did with him last year</a>, and (for comparison) <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2002/nov/30/spaceexploration.business">another one from 2002 focusing on his role as a space tourist</a>.</p><p><em>You can follow our links and commentary each day through Twitter (<a href="http://www.twitter.com/guardiantech">@guardiantech</a>, or our <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/page/2007/dec/10/1">personal accounts</a>) or by watching our <a href="http://delicious.com/guardianista">Delicious feed</a>.</em></p><div class="related" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"><ul><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/blackberry">BlackBerry</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/mobilephones">Mobile phones</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/iphone">iPhone</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/windows">Windows</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/microsoft/">Microsoft</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/opensource">Open source</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/software">Software</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/computing">Computing</a></li></ul></div><div class="author"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/bobbiejohnson">Bobbie Johnson</a></div><br/><div class="terms"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">guardian.co.uk</a> &copy; Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our <a href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html">Terms & Conditions</a> | <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/help/feeds">More Feeds</a></div><p style="clear:both" />
MySQL founder protests against Oracle takeover
<div class="track"><img alt="" src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.20.3/90741?ns=guardian&pageName=MySQL+founder+protests+against+Oracle+takeover%3AArticle%3A1318461&ch=Technology&c3=GU.co.uk&c4=Oracle%2CSun+Microsystems+%28Technology%29%2CSoftware+%28Technology%29%2CComputing+%28Technology%29%2CInternet%2CTechnology%2CEuropean+commission+%28News%29%2CBusiness%2COpen+source+%28Technology%29&c6=Bobbie+Johnson&c7=09-Dec-14&c8=1318461&c9=Article&c10=News&c11=Technology&c13=&c25=&c30=content&h2=GU%2FTechnology%2FOracle" width="1" height="1" /></div><p>One of the creators of a technology that underpins millions of websites is asking people to protest against Oracle's attempted takeover Silicon Valley rival Sun Microsystems.</p><p>Finnish entrepreneur Michael Widenius - known as Monty - says that the European Commission must block the $7bn deal as a way to protect the future of MySQL, the database company he helped found in 1995. </p><p>"I just don't buy it that Oracle will be a good home for MySQL," he wrote in a <a href="http://monty-says.blogspot.com/2009/12/help-saving-mysql.html">post on his blog</a>. </p><p>MySQL is "used in many of the world's largest companies and they use it for an increasing number of purposes" he added. </p><p>"This not only scares but actually hurts Oracle every day."</p><p>MySQL itself is an open source technology, but the company behind it was <a href="http://www.mysql.com/news-and-events/sun-to-acquire-mysql.html">sold to Sun</a> by Widenius and his investors in 2008 for $1bn. Following a series of financial difficulties, however, Sun became vulnerable and is now <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/apr/20/oracle-buys-sun-microsystems">the subject of a takeover bid by Oracle</a>, one of the world's most powerful software companies.</p><p>European regulators have said they are concerned whether the deal would give Oracle an unfair hold over the massively lucrative database market, worth approximately £12bn a year. Bringing MySQL under the same roof as the Oracle Database product would give a single company control of a majority of the market, something competition commissioner Neelie Kroes said she intended to "examine very carefully".</p><p>Now Widenius is urging people to contact their representatives to help block Oracle's purchase, saying that it is imperative for the future of competition - and for MySQL itself.</p><p>"I have spent the last 27 years creating and working on MySQL and I hope, together with my team of MySQL core developers, to work on it for many more years," he said. </p><p>"With your support there is a good chance that the European Commission (from which Oracle needs approval) could prevent this from happening or demand Oracle to change the terms... Without your support it might not. The EC is our last big hope because the US government approved the deal."</p><p>Oracle <a href="http://www.google.co.uk/url?q=http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704193004574588112464008166.html">recently lobbied officials in Europe</a> over their concerns, having already won approval from the US justice department - who <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2009/nov/10/oracle-sun-europe">last month said</a> that the merger is "unlikely to be anti-competitive".</p><p>Because MySQL is open source software - meaning that anybody can get access to the code that underpins it, and can therefore theoretically "fork" a new project spinning off the old one - some have argued that Oracle would gain little from its takeover.</p><p>However Widenius says he thinks that Oracle could easily find a way to shut down or kill off MySQL because it competes with the company's own proprietary database system. </p><p>"A fork is not enough to keep MySQL alive for all future, if Oracle - as the copyright holder - would at any point decide that they should kill MySQL."</p><div class="related" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"><ul><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/oracle">Oracle</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/sun-microsystems">Sun Microsystems</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/software">Software</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/computing">Computing</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/internet">Internet</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/european-commission">European commission</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/opensource">Open source</a></li></ul></div><div class="author"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/bobbiejohnson">Bobbie Johnson</a></div><br/><div class="terms"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">guardian.co.uk</a> &copy; Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our <a href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html">Terms & Conditions</a> | <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/help/feeds">More Feeds</a></div><p style="clear:both" />
Is Google Chrome OS cloud computing's silver lining?
<div class="track"><img alt="" src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.20.3/32422?ns=guardian&pageName=Is+Google+Chrome+OS+cloud+computing%27s+silver+lining%3F%3AArticle%3A1309896&ch=Technology&c3=Guardian&c4=Google+%28Technology%29%2CComputing+%28Technology%29%2CTechnology%2CCloud+computing+%28Technology%29%2COpen+source+%28Technology%29%2CMicrosoft+%28Technology%29&c6=Jack+Schofield&c7=09-Nov-25&c8=1309896&c9=Article&c10=&c11=Technology&c13=&c25=&c30=content&h2=GU%2FTechnology%2FGoogle" width="1" height="1" /></div><p class="standfirst">It's based on open source, but Chrome, Google's cloud computing OS, will lock users into an unmodifiable world. Is this limiting or liberating?</p><p>Although it won't be available for another year, Google's Chrome OS is an attempt to take over the fast-growing netbook part of the PC market, which is currently dominated by Microsoft. It's aimed at people who live their lives online, and who can do everything they need in a Google Chrome browser. And if you've been following the hype for "cloud computing," Chrome OS is designed specifically to work with the cloud. Installing your own software simply isn't allowed.</p><p>If Chrome OS takes off, it will give Google an unprecedented degree of power over PC vendors, who will only be able to use components that Google specifies and supports. Google will control and maintain the operating system remotely, so if it doesn't want you to have something, you can't have it. It's like having an auto-update service that you can't turn off.</p><h2><strong>World domination</strong></h2><p>Early signs of this power surfaced last week during an online Google press conference. For example, the presenters said Chrome OS netbooks wouldn't be allowed to use hard drives (Flash memory boots faster) and that Google would specify which Wi-Fi cards it would support. Sundar Pichai, a Google vice-president of product management, also said Chrome OS would be used on "slightly larger" netbooks: "We care about the user experience."</p><p>In theory, companies could change the open source code themselves, or even use a different browser. But then Google's servers wouldn't support it. There's nothing new about the idea of a Chrome OS machine, and there's not much that's new in the code: it's based on open-source projects such as Linux, WebKit and Moblin. Also, Google has been careful to point out its limited ambitions for Chrome OS netbooks. The initial "use cases" include "computing on the couch" and "a lightweight, secondary work computer". It's not trying to replace traditional PCs running Windows or Mac OS X.</p><p>"There are some applications that are not available on the web. There are some things that this machine will not be able to do," said Pichai. "It's a companion device. Most users we expect to have another machine at home."</p><p>Chrome OS is optimised for the latest, draft-n version of Wi-Fi so it's assumed users can get that from their couch, or at work. Chrome OS netbooks will also work in Wi-Fi hotspots and on a small number of trains and planes, but their offline capabilities are limited.</p><p>This could make Chrome OS netbooks a non-starter for most people, but the assumption is that the future will provide solutions for more people in more places. web applications will become more powerful, which will reduce the need for specialised applications software, and fast, free Wi-Fi will become more widely available. When both things happen, Google could end up controlling a significant portion of the PC market.</p><p>The aim, says Pichai, is to make your PC work like a TV: you just turn it on and in a few seconds you can do what you want. In this case, it's assumed that what you want to do is check your email, use social networking sites such as Facebook and Twitter, look up maps, and so on.</p><p>These are the sorts of things people can already do with a smartphone, and Google is competing in the smartphone market with its Android software. However, Chrome OS takes the idea even further than Android or Apple's iPhone by eliminating local applications. There won't be a Chrome OS app store, and Chrome OS netbooks won't run Android apps, because all the apps are online apps.</p><p>Eliminating local apps means Google can strip out everything that isn't required to run the Chrome browser, so the final code should be smaller and faster. It also means Google can prevent users (and malware writers) from messing around with the operating system: if a single byte is changed, it can replace the whole thing.</p><p>Further simplification comes from not supporting local devices such as MP3 players and digital cameras, except as USB storage devices. Many of Windows' complications come from its support for tens of thousands of different hardware components and add-on devices. Chrome OS does not try to do either. While this is limiting, it's also liberating. Users no longer have to worry about maintaining their computer: Google does that. Also, users won't have to make backups because there is no hard drive and no local data to back up: everything is stored online. (Some data will be cached on the device for off-line use, but it's all encrypted.)</p><p>It also means Chrome OS computers can be shared around the house, or in cafes, schools and libraries. "Your" netbook is, in effect, stored online, in the cloud. Any device becomes "yours" when you log on.</p><p>Google still has some problems to solve ? support for local printing is one example ? and has yet to reach deals with potential manufacturing partners. However, assuming Chrome OS netbooks appear on the market, will they be a success?</p><p>Historically, the omens aren't good. In the mid-90s, Oracle's boss, Larry Ellison, got a huge amount of publicity for simplified "network computers", but they flopped. Microsoft had at least two goes at the idea, with WebTV (set-top box computers that plugged into a TV set) and, in 1999, Web Companions running its Windows CE operating system, the basis of Windows Mobile. Around the same time, lots of manufacturers tried to sell WebPads as simple internet access devices, based on <a href="http://www.amd.com/us-en/ConnectivitySolutions/ProductInformation/0,,50_2330_9863_9907%5E9915,00.html" title="AMD">an AMD design</a>.</p><p>A decade later, however, the idea's time may have come.</p><h2><strong>Practical apps</strong></h2><p>One person who should take a bullish view is Nick Carr, whose influential book, The Big Switch, predicates a shift from desktop to cloud computing. He says: "My sense of the Chrome OS is that, while it represents an obvious next step for web-based computing, the inability to install applications may limit its adoption, at least for the next few years. I think it will be a while before mainstream computer users will be ready to give up the option to run their own apps and store their own data, even if they're more than happy to do most of their computing through a browser.</p><p>"Chrome OS is a smart way for Google to push forward the concept and the technology of cloud computing, but I wouldn't expect it to take the world by storm upon its release," adds Carr.</p><p>Storing data online is a critical point for some people because online sites go bust, and because people can be locked out of their Google accounts for no apparent reason. But Ray Valdes, a Gartner analyst based in the US, points out that people lose data "when it's in the safety of their own homes", so it could be argued that Google's servers are safer for these users.</p><p>Valdes says: "Google is trying to redefine the notion of a netbook, which in the past has been a watered-down laptop: something that's cheaper but not as satisfying. Google is trying to change that value proposition so that a netbook is a faster, richer, more secure experience: it will be a different kind of value proposition than a laptop. If Google is able to do that, it will be very successful."</p><div class="related" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"><ul><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/google">Google</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/computing">Computing</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/cloud-computing">Cloud computing</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/opensource">Open source</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/microsoft/">Microsoft</a></li></ul></div><div class="author"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/jackschofield">Jack Schofield</a></div><br/><div class="terms"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">guardian.co.uk</a> &copy; Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our <a href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html">Terms & Conditions</a> | <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/help/feeds">More Feeds</a></div><p style="clear:both" />
Windows 7 or Ubuntu 9.10 ? battle of the operating systems
<div class="track"><img alt="" src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.20.3/14097?ns=guardian&pageName=Windows+7+or+Ubuntu+9.10+%E2%80%93+battle+of+the+operating+systems%3AArticle%3A1300594&ch=Technology&c3=Guardian&c4=Open+source+%28Technology%29%2CTechnology%2CWindows+7%2CWindows+%28Technology%29%2CLinux+%28Technology%29%2CComputing+%28Technology%29&c6=Kevin+Anderson&c7=09-Nov-04&c8=1300594&c9=Article&c10=Review&c11=Technology&c13=&c25=&c30=content&h2=GU%2FTechnology%2FOpen+source" width="1" height="1" /></div><p class="standfirst">Whether you're a die-hard Windows fan or a Linux evangelist, here is the lowdown on the latest updates</p><p>Operating systems have become like buses: you wait ages for an OS update, and then three turn up at once. Apple let Snow Leopard out of its cage in August, and then, last Thursday, Microsoft released Windows 7, a major update of Vista. At the same time, Canonical chose to release "Karmic Koala" ? which is otherwise known as the open-source operating system Ubuntu 9.10.</p><p>In the <a href="http://news.softpedia.com/news/Happy-Birthday-Ubuntu-124827.shtml" title="Happy Birthday, Ubuntu">five years since its launch</a>, Ubuntu has become one of the most popular Linuxes; though popular for servers or embedded systems, it remains a minority as a desktop operating system. Some put the figures as low as 1%, though the enthusiasts put the figure closer to 12%.</p><p>Taking the vital aspects of an operating system into account, which is better, Ubuntu 9.10 or Windows 7?</p><h2><strong>Speed</strong></h2><p>In terms of speed, if you've got an older computer that is starting to feel sluggish but you either don't want to or can't afford to buy a new computer, give Ubuntu a go. You'll get an up-to-date operating system running quite smoothly on your out-of-date computer.</p><p><strong>Verdict:</strong> Windows 7 is much better than Vista on older hardware, while Ubuntu always has been strong on a wide range of hardware.</p><h2><strong>Drivers and hardware</strong></h2><p>Ubuntu is generally good at recognising hardware. Windows needed a driver downloaded for my vintage 3Com Wi-Fi PC Card, but it worked right away with Ubuntu ? and even improved from 9.04 to 9.10. Ubuntu added extensions to take advantage of special keys for my laptop, and when I plugged in a spare Mac keyboard, it handled special Mac-centric keys too such as the CD eject button.</p><p>If Ubuntu doesn't automatically install a driver, it can be quite a bit of effort getting something to work, and not all hardware and peripherals will work with Linux. Sometimes you'll have to go to the command line, which is terrifying territory for most users. It's worth checking to see if Linux drivers exist for your printer and other key peripherals.</p><p>Windows has always had issues with drivers. I still am baffled why Windows forgets hardware that I have installed previously. Windows 7 doesn't seem to have completely solved these issues.</p><p><strong>Verdict</strong>: Both Microsoft and Ubuntu could improve how they handle drivers.</p><h2><strong>Multimedia</strong></h2><p>Looking at the default applications that come with both Windows 7 and Karmic Koala, Ubuntu installs the Rhythmbox player for music and the Movie Player for video. Both are capable, and anyone familiar with Apple's iTunes will find the application easy to navigate.</p><p>Because of licensing restrictions and Ubuntu's own philosophy, it does not ship with the ability to play commercial DVDs. It's relatively easy to add commercial DVD support by adding Ubuntu Restricted Extras in the Software Centre.</p><p>Most versions of Windows 7 come with Windows Media Player and Media Centre. The Media Centre is impressive and polished. It organises your pictures, video and music files, and it gives you the kind of 10-foot interface that works well from your couch in the lounge.</p><p><strong>Verdict:</strong> Microsoft wins this one with its Media Centre, though Linux enthusiasts will be quick to point out the digital-rights management issues of Windows.</p><h2><strong>Software and applications</strong></h2><p>In terms of software, Ubuntu is like the iPhone. Almost anything you'd care to do, there's an app for that. However, you'll have to learn to translate from the applications that you're used to on the Mac or Windows. For people looking to make the switch to Linux, <a href="http://www.osalt.com/" title="osalt.com">osalt.com</a> is a good directory of open-source alternatives to common commercial software.</p><p>Ubuntu comes with <a href="http://www.openoffice.org/" title="OpenOffice">OpenOffice</a> and <a href="http://www.gimp.org/" title="Gimp">Gimp</a> photo editing software installed.</p><p>Windows 7 users will need to buy Microsoft Office, or you can also download OpenOffice and Gimp. Windows users will be used to Outlook to handle their email. Ubuntu ships with Evolution, which handles email and also has calendar software.</p><p>Ubuntu 9.10 comes with Firefox 3.5 as standard, and it now ships with the Empathy multiple protocol instant messaging client. Empathy works with most instant messaging systems including AIM, Gtalk/Jabber, MSN and IRC, just to name a few.</p><p>Windows 7 has Windows Live messenger and ships with Microsoft's internet Explorer 8, which is a vast improvement over previous versions. You'll have to download Windows Live messenger as part of the Windows Live apps. To install other applications, Ubuntu 9.10 changed the Add/Remove Software application with a refreshed tool called Ubuntu Software Centre. You can search the directory full of hundreds of applications.</p><p><strong>Verdict: </strong>Ubuntu wins this hands-down with a huge range of free software packages ready to download.</p><h2><strong>Cloud computing</strong></h2><p>Ubuntu 9.10 brings cloud storage to the masses with its Ubuntu One service. It's simple and well integrated. Whenever you save a file, you have the option to save it directly to Ubuntu One. Up to 2GB of storage is free, and you can pay for higher amounts of storage.</p><p>You can also share files with other people, and your files are easily available on other computers, even ones not running Ubuntu. The service is in beta, though, so I'd expect a few glitches.</p><p>Microsoft has a remote storage and remote desktop service in beta called <a href="https://www.mesh.com/welcome/default.aspx" title="Live Mesh">Live Mesh</a> and <a href="http://skydrive.live.com/" title="SkyDrive">SkyDrive</a>, which offers 25GB of storage for free. It's not yet integrated into the operating system and Microsoft is under scrutiny about what it integrates into the OS because of its market dominance.</p><p><strong>Verdict: </strong>Ubuntu wins this as well. Live Mesh isn't as well integrated yet as Ubuntu One is immediately from startup.</p><h2><strong>Ease of use</strong></h2><p>This is subjective. I've spent the past two years using Ubuntu, and find it relatively easy. However, just like any new operating system, there is a learning curve, and Linux advocates often gloss over this. Ubuntu has made great strides, but average users will still struggle with it at times.</p><p>Adding new software sources so that you can easily install applications such as Skype or Google Earth will be beyond most average users. User interface design still lags behind software on Mac OS X and Windows 7.</p><p>Windows 7 will be an adjustment for XP users. Vista users won't notice a change apart from a faster, smoother experience and fewer annoying pop-ups second-guessing your choices.</p><p><strong>Verdict: </strong>Windows still is easier to use than Linux for some key tasks. Ubuntu is making a lot of progress, but Microsoft has stepped up its game as well.</p><h2><strong>Final Verdict</strong></h2><p>Windows 7 is a worthy successor to Windows XP. Vista had well-known flaws, which meant it never replaced XP for most users. For those with a lot of investment in Windows software, there probably will be no reason to look elsewhere.</p><p>For those not that tied into the world of Windows, Ubuntu is certainly worth a look. Consumers have never had more choices for capable, powerful and easy to use operating systems, and Ubuntu is only one Linux distribution.</p><p>I had tried Linux frequently as soon as I got broadband almost 10 years ago, but I always gave up after a few days until the arrival of Ubuntu. It is a relatively easy-to-use, modern operating system, and one that will only cost you the time to download it.</p><p><strong>Read a </strong><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/blog/2009/oct/27/ubuntu-koala-windows7-review" title="Review: Ubuntu 9.10 v Windows 7"><strong>longer version of this article</strong></a></p><div class="related" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"><ul><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/opensource">Open source</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/windows-7">Windows 7</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/windows">Windows</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/linux">Linux</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/computing">Computing</a></li></ul></div><div class="author"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/kevinanderson">Kevin Anderson</a></div><br/><div class="terms"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">guardian.co.uk</a> &copy; Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our <a href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html">Terms & Conditions</a> | <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/help/feeds">More Feeds</a></div><p style="clear:both" />
Welcome to Brussels - where 'open' can mean 'closed'
<div class="track"><img alt="" src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.20.3/27946?ns=guardian&pageName=Welcome+to+Brussels+-+where+%27open%27+can+mean+%27closed%27%3AArticle%3A1300204&ch=Technology&c3=GU.co.uk&c4=Open+source+%28Technology%29%2CPolitics+and+technology%2CTechnology&c6=Bobbie+Johnson&c7=09-Nov-03&c8=1300204&c9=Article&c10=Blogpost&c11=Technology&c13=&c25=Technology+blog&c30=content&h2=GU%2FTechnology%2FOpen+source" width="1" height="1" /></div><p>There are few things that annoy me more than fake transparency. The duplicity of being lied to makes it all the worse when you realise somebody who says they're being open with you is, in fact, just pretending.</p><p>Right now, we're experiencing an epidemic of openness, particularly in government. Just witness the way that everybody from <a href="http://www.open.gov">Barack Obama</a> to <a href="http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/0,1000000121,39381027,00.htm">David Cameron</a> to <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2009/oct/14/san-francisco-open-city-data">San Francisco</a> is jumping on the open bandwagon to get an idea of the importance of the concept of openness in government at the moment. Along the way, the buzzword gets grabbed by anyone trying to appear transparent - such as Adobe, who are trying to <a href="http://sunlightlabs.com/blog/2009/adobe-bad-open-government/">market closed standards as open ones</a> in order to get more business from government.</p><p>Now, it seems, there could be a whole new attempt to pay lip service to openness for me to get annoyed about. </p><p>Somewhere in a dark corner of the Brussels, there is a document known as the European Interoperability Framework - an outline for governments giving them a basic idea of how to make sure their computer systems work together.</p><p>The EIF is not the law, per se, but it is an important guideline that helps set a number of standards for wonks and policy people, so that (hopefully) the right decisions get made at a national and local level. </p><p>That's not only important because it might boost efficiency somewhere along the line, but because it promotes cooperation, competition and transparency - and stops corporate interests from getting an unfair lock on government business. </p><p>Well, a new version of the EIF is being drafted and Glyn Moody, a sometime contributor to these pages, has written about the subject <a href="http://www.computerworlduk.com/community/blogs/index.cfm?entryid=2620&blogid=14">over at ComputerWorld UK</a>. Thanks to a leaked version of the document, he points out that Europe could be preparing to dramatically alter the wording of the document in a way that seriously changes the for what is considered an open standard.</p><p>The old guidance, which has been in place since 2004, was a fairly straightforward definition: maintained by a non-profit group and updated in public view, cost-free, royalty-free and reusable.</p><p>The new one? Here's what the <a href="http://www.bigwobber.nl/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/European-Interoperability-Framework-for-European-Public-Services-draft.pdf">leaked document</a> (PDF) says:</p><blockquote><p>Within the context of the EIF, openness is the willingness of persons, organisations or other members of a community of interest to share knowledge and to stimulate debate within that community of interest, having as ultimate goal the advancement of knowledge and the use thereof to solve relevant problems. In that sense, openness leads to considerable gains in efficiency.</p></blockquote><p>So now, if this draft gets ratified, "openness" becomes merely the willingness to share - a closed system can become open if the participants talk about it publicly, whether they actually open anything up or not.</p><p>It's easy to get excised about semantics, but hey - I work with words, and I think they can be very powerful things. Perhaps it's time to take back the word "open" or redefine it so that it can't be abused.</p><div class="related" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"><ul><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/opensource">Open source</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/politics">Politics and technology</a></li></ul></div><div class="author"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/bobbiejohnson">Bobbie Johnson</a></div><br/><div class="terms"><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">guardian.co.uk</a> &copy; Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our <a href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html">Terms & Conditions</a> | <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/help/feeds">More Feeds</a></div><p style="clear:both" />

Free Software
Free Hacking Software
Free Landscape Design Software
Free Anti Virus Software
Free Virus Removal Software
Free Music Mixing Software
Mp4 Software Download Free
Free Dvd Burning Software
Free Mobile Phone Unlocking Software
Free Cad Software
Free Mobile Software
Download Free Photo Software
Free Project Management Software
Free Home Design Software
Free Web Album Software
Free Image Editing Software
Download Free Mavis Beacon Typing Software
Free Pc Tv Software
Free Recording Software
Free Web Software
Totally Free Software To Remove Spyware Completely
Free Unlocking Software
Gps Software Free
Dvd Copy Software Free
Free Office Software

© 2009 . All rights reserved. Information on free software