Ubuntu-Pakistan Licencing reasons

Wed Dec 6 09:45:17 GMT 2006

On 12/6/06, Waqas Toor <waqasnasirtoor at gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Burhan
>
> On 12/6/06, Burhan Khalid <burhan.khalid at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> >
> > First of all, shoddy marketing exists everywhere. So to use that as an
> > excuse is a bit tiresome. Everyone that has been in the industry for a
> > while has been bombarded with all kinds of marketing spin -- and the
> > quality of spin that comes from Microsoft is one of the best (since
> > they have the dollars to pump into their marketing schemes).  Everyone
> > has been doing false advertising. Tobacco companies have been doing it
> > for years.
>
>
> but still we are bound to use them ? have you ever thought of that ?
> we are compelled to do that ... vendors making modems specially for MS
> , printers for MS , key boards mouse and a lot ... is this comes under
> marketing or monoply you have to decide

Of course you are not. It is your choice to purchase a computer with
Windows and a winmodem. I choose to purchase my systems without an
operating system.

Businesses are there to make money. What is more feasible to you as a
business? Take a risk and develop some hardware, then sell it at a
higher cost to a niche market -- or, develop hardware that is
compatible with 90% of the world's desktops, and reduce the cost
because you know you can sell more?

We can't deny that Windows has a monopoly on the desktop. Whose fault
it is? Why is it a fault? Can't we just accept that Linux has a great
challenge if it has to come close to being considered a viable desktop
alternative?

Speaking of software and costs -- just yesterday in Kuwait (where I am
based) I saw a sight that made me grin from ear to ear. A company was
selling Acer laptops preloaded with Fedora :) No Windows.

>
> > As I have mentioned above, these false promises exist everywhere; so
> > lets not argue on that criterion. However, their prices are high --
> > which is a price that they know they can charge because people are
> > willing to pay for it.  Why? Because of any number of reasons ...
> > excellent marketing, people are used to Windows, training costs,
> > platform migration costs, long term viability -- all these are factors
> > that lead businesses to purchase Windows licenses -- or more
> > appropriate, buy into the Windows Server System. In business whose
> > core operations rely on their IT, cost is not the #1 factor, its is
> > more operational capabilities, support and long term availabilty.  Why
> > do you think RedHat offers enterprise support packages? Because that
> > is what businesses want.
>
> OSS people have always  earned from their support ... but paying for
> windows software $500 and a $500 plus for Office and more dollars for
> support ( excluding time into monetary values ) have we ever thought
> of contributing $10 to any OSS project ?

This is a great point, I agree with you 100%, which is why I donate to
OS projects :)

>
> > In the end, they do not care of the cost, they care that it does their
> > job, and when it breaks (should it break) they have someone else to
> > blame.  That is the real cost of software.
>
> a good written and properly test software never breaks ... unless some
> exceptions of hardware failure or power failure ... check OpenBSD for
> that ... it seldom breaks becuase the code audit team are more tight
> than in linux or MS

Clearly, if you have developed any kind of software at any scale, you
know better than to say "never breaks". Everything breaks. Its just
how long it takes and what damage it does when it does break is what
is important.

>
>
> > This is a bit far fetched, but I will take what message you are trying
> > to get across here. That is that with Linux, you can breathe new life
> > into otherwise obsolete hardware and thus save businesses money.
> >
> > I would love to see what application you are proposing that runs on a
> > Pentium 1 at the same desktop response as a "fast" server.
>
> it depends ... i am running a 486 machine with 32 mb ram and 500mb
> harddisk as my network fire wall with IPCop ... so its upto you ..
> kernel is almost 400 to 500 kb in size ... its the services that eat
> up the ram

Yes, but the poster original mentioned 'desktop speeds'. Of course,
you are not running that as your primary workstation. That was my
point.  Everyone knows, the best use of a 486 with a network card is a
firewall :) Hell, you don't even need a hard disk.

> > I use MS software at work. I run two workstations. I do not see your
> > worms and shareware popups. I'm sure I don't have to tell you -- its
> > not the software but the operator. You can run a workstation with
> > proper attitude and not have to worry about such things.
> >
> > I never once received a virus, worm or shareware popup from a program
> > developed by Microsoft. I have seen people install "junkware" that
> > provides these things.  The fact that there is no just "junkware" on
> > Linux is only a testament to the fact that Linux is not widespread on
> > the desktop, thus it is not a lucrative target for developers of such
> > programs.
>
> then you are the only one my brother ... its not MS is bad ... but the
> code behind the windows is bad ... i can see ip_conntrack in linux and
> can see what my net is upto ... but i cant see it in windows :(
> and these are just small issues that windows dont shows us ... if i
> get a blaster worm why should i buy an antivirus for more thn $300
> again ... ?

You should install Ethereal for Windows :)

As far as the blaster worm comment -- I don't why you hadn't already
bought the av in the first place :P

>
> > To say that such programs don't affect Linux is foolish. If we want to
> > see Linux advance on the desktop and become more mainstream than it is
> > now, then we must also be prepared to acknowledge that once it becomes
> > popular, it will be a wider target for junkware developers.
>
> nah i dont agree ... its been in the market for a very long time now
> ... and almost cattering 64 % of the internet webserver market so and
> MS is on 34% ...so again its getting late for the coders to purely
> crack the software ... why becuase OSS has a bigger community that can
> test it ... why becuase its free .. even i can test it with attacks ..
> but for MS i have to get a licenced version to test it :) again pay
> them

You see, it is your choice to deploy open source, and that's great.
For businessess that have already invested in the Microsoft system --
to come to them and say -- "you are wasting your money" or other such
nonsense that I have seen come from so called "Linux evangelists" is
just stupid and unprofessional. If you really want a business to
shift, you will stop arguing the same 'flamewar' topics and instead
concentrate on how a shift or migration would help their business line
dramatically.

Case in point -- I have a business client that already had a large
investment in Windows Servers and everything is running great. They
were thinking of setting up a new webserver farm for a new business
project; and they called me in to evaluate some of the offers they had
recieved.  I showed them, in plain dollars and sense how a different
approach would save them money.  My approach happened to be with Linux
clustering.  They were a bit apprehensive at first, saying that Linux
is for "hackers" and saying things that I imagine they got from people
evangelizing Linux in the wrong way.

>
> > Yes, and what is your point here? I have seen rootkits on Linux
> > servers and compromised machines that are running RH and sending out
> > thosands of spam messages.
>
>  again as you said bussiness wants to get profits ... then this spam
> is legal why are we fighting the SPAM then ?

You missed my point. My point was that there are compromises in each
system. To say that Linux is foolproof is foolhardy.

Spam is a problem for any business, and it has nothing to do with
Linux or Windows.  You forget that spam was around before emails took
off :)

>
> > It is all the reponsibility of the operator. If you have a properly
> > trained operator running a server, then the chances of such things are
> > minimized.
>
> very true
>
> > It is their choice to buy such software (you mentioned they paid for
> > it).  You can easily spend that money on buying software that doesn't
> > do such things.  If you are trying to allude to some software
> > developed by Microsoft, which one?
> >
> > I have paid for the following Microsoft products:
> >
> > Windows XP
> > Windows Server 2003
> > Microsoft Office Professional 2003
> > Visual Studio .NET
> its good that you paid for them ... but how many of us can afford ???
> and this is nothing oracle and sql server give per processor licences
> ... then why not postgres ?

This comes down to a business decision. Maybe they don't consider
postgres to be mature enough? Who is going to support them? Is it
compatible with their current (example) Oracle Financials or SAP
systems? Where will they find proficient people in postgres?  All
these questions come up.

>
>
> > Is this the machine that you talked about above? With the 500 GB of
> > disk space and BEST OSS software? If so, this is not the machine of
> > 2015. People have been predicting the demise of commerical software
> > giants like Microsoft and Oracle for a long time now.  What they don't
> > seem to realize is that there is a very good market for such products;
> > and as long as people and businesses are using computers, they will
> > need a company to back them up.
>
> again never pay a opensource coder a dime but pay those companies a dollar :)
> this is all monoply ... no open documents on hardware architecture ...
> just BLOBS and only BLOBs
>
>
> > My prediction is that software will become a service, rather than a product.
> its a product .. not tangible but in the form of 0s and 1s and its a
> long debate

I meant in a way that you rent software, much like you do water and electricity.

>
> > > Not many people can see the long term trends.
> > >
> > > The prediction of MS Office for Linux was 2007 and this prediction was made
> > > by somebody in 1998. Way before Open office existed.
> >
> > Who made this prediction? Do you have a link or a reference?
> yeah who made this prediction ?
> >
> > Yet some chant each year that "This is the year of Linux on the
> > desktop". Its all on who you ask :)
> the main problem with linux is its difficult ... but now its not and
> after 5 years it wont be ... why becuase things are maturing ... what
> i want you to do is write an application for free and give it to
> others ,.... and then let others copy it and remove your name and
> paste their own ( ftp.exe .. was Netbsd's , sockets were bsd sockets ,
> and a lot more )
> it hurts right ?
> but salute to those guys who are writing for free and giving free
> support why becuase they believe in computing is for fun ... and not
> some DRM issue :)
>
> forget if some thing hurts ... consider me a noob ... but cant help it

We are all noobs in the game of life.

Regards,
Burhan

> PS. i dont use linux becuase i hate windows i use it becuase i love my computer
> --
> Waqas Toor
> member of Ubuntu Pakistani Team
> waqas at ubuntu-pk.org
> http://www.ubuntu-pk.org
>
> Linux *is* user friendly. It's just selective about who its friends are.
> In a world without walls and fences, who needs windows and Gates ?
>
> http://waqastoor.weblog.pk
> (Registered Linux user #424056)
> ref link http://counter.li.org/
>