Tsikbal: from my perspective

With Microsoft open sourcing its ASP.NET framework, and the fact that a replacement for the Internet Explorer browser called  Spartan in the works to be shipped with Windows 10, radical change might be coming faster and deeper than anyone can imagine. I believe that Microsoft might continue to keep making more of its software open source, yet I don't think that it would open source all of it. Ideally, Microsoft should make the move completely to open source. The move would be greatly beneficial for Microsoft itself, the users of its products, and the open source community. The idea of having Windows becoming open source, is one that can really makes me happy and gives me some hope that it would make easier for open source software to reach more people. Having Windows as an example of open source, would make a lot to help people to trust open source software in a way they don't do at the moment. What's more, turning software from proprietary to open source se...

At work, tablets proved to be a popular gift. And though I find tablets can be useful, they are not for me. My needs are not meet by tablets at all, I prefer ultrabooks and smartphone combination. The main reason for this, is that I prefer the ultrabook when I'm not moving around. Since I tend to read, while I've several other thing running on the background like my audio player and IMs, or writing, the tablet doesn't really does a good job at that. When I'm on the move, I like to have something I can get on my pocket and get out of the way when I'm not responding to messages, checking for directions, taking a picture, or listening to music. As such, the tablet doesn't really fits my needs. When I write comments, and specially on my blog, I prefer the comfort that a physical keyboard gives me. Call me old fashioned, but I like the feedback I get from the keyboard with each stroke. And for the short messages on Whatsapp, Facebook, or Twitter, the sma...

It seems that no matter what, I keep coming back to the Unity user interface . After a couple of weeks of using the MATE user interface , I just had to move back to Unity. I really liked the experience I got with MATE, yet it lack something that Unity gives me. It's not something tangible, it's mostly my personal taste. I do recommend MATE as an option, yet personally I prefer running Unity. The major change I make to the stock setting, is using the Numix theme and circular icons. Personally, no other user interface quite fits what I want my desktop to work and feel quite as well as Unity does. My two other favorite user interfaces, MATE and Cinnamon simply don't work as well for me. In a way, this is way I like GNU/Linux. I like to have my choice of how my OS works, and how it looks. My personal choice is Ubuntu running Unity, though I also like and recommend Linux Mint running Cinnamon. I haven't used Mate on Linux Mint, yet I do like it and recommend it...

That Tallef Fog Heen had to quit as a Debian systemd maintainer do to bulling as he explains on his blog , reflects badly on all the open source community. There is an urgent need to change the way dissent is shown, since it is only given in a negative way which is not beneficial to anyone. Though dissent, and the debate that comes with it, make communities healthy, we can't allow it to descend into bulling when other don't agree with the other's side view point. Sometimes the project we support, makes the choices we agree with. While other times, it will make the choices we don't agree, or like, with. Keep in mind that with any change comes to a project, it must come with consensus of the majority. This means that not everyone needs to agree with the change, if the majority comes to the agreement to make the change proposed. By resorting to name calling, and bullying, those who don't agree with us, we are not creating the kind of environment really nee...

After hearing a lot of good things about the Mate desktop environment , and the fact that it became available for Ubuntu, I've decided to give it a spin. So far, I've liked much. I got remained of why I fell in love with GNU/Linux, and Ubuntu in particular, in the first place. I felt right at home from the start, and I didn't have much trouble getting up to speed with it. Ever since Ubuntu started using Unity desktop environment as default on the Ubuntu 11.04 Natty Narwhal release, Unity became my go to desktop environment. I've tried using Cinnamon desktop environment with Linux Mint a couple of times now, but never felt as comfortable with as I'm with Unity. Yet, Mate has felt a lot better than both Unity and Cinnamon have so far. The best part for me, is that I can run it on Ubuntu with ease. Which means that I don't have to leave my favorite distro to use Mate, while getting the desktop experience I feel most comfortable with. I know that...

One of the biggest misconceptions about open source software, is that one needs to be a skilled programmer, or even a hacker, in order to use it at all. Yet, even though having such skill do help trouble shoot some of the problems one can encounter while using any software, it's not mandatory since there are ways to get help from people who know how to fix the problems you might encounter. What's true, is that depending on the GNU/Linux distribution the needed technical skill change. Distros like Linux Mint and Ubuntu are really friendly to people who don't have that many computers skills to use it. Then you have distros like Arch Linux and Debian, where having a strong technical skill set is very important to have to use it to their full potential. It's not like your average user wouldn't be able to use it, but they will not have a good experience with them when they run into problems. Open source software can be used by everyone, independently of how ...

Robert Lindh's blog post over at opensource.com , make a good point arguing that open source software might need a re branding. There is no need to change the core principals of the movement, but how they are conveyed to people who are not familiar with them. One of the biggest obstacles that keep people from embracing free software is their perception, and it only gets worse when it comes to free and open-source software . At the core of free and open source software are the user rights, so that they truly own their both their computer and software. They can do with them as they please, but that doesn't mean that others can do it as well. It's also about people coming together to build communities around the software they use to make it better, by sharing the changes they made to it among themselves. Also, making it safer by looking for bugs and vulnerabilities in order to take them out. Free and open source is not about people working for free, or stealing ...

I upgraded to the Ubuntu 14.10 Utupic Unicorn last Friday, and even though there aren't that many changes on the user side, I've felt an improvement from the Ubuntu 14.04 LTS Trusty Tahr release. One of the main things that people points out about Utupic Unicorn, is the fact that it doesn't bring that many changes along with it. I don't really see it as an issue, since with all the work being done on Mir display server, Unity 8 and Ubuntu Touch it's just a matter of time before we are just getting some breathing room before the bulk of the changes to Ubuntu come our way on later releases leading to the 16.04 LTS release. As I said before, so far my experience with Utupic Unicorn has been quite good. There has been some small bumps along the way, but having passed just a few days since it was released it's expected. Getting it just the way I like it took me about 45 minutes at most, and easy as pie. So far, Canonical has been delivering an OS that...

Yesterday Ubuntu marked it's 10th birthday, quite a landmark since there many other distros that have come and gone during this time. Personally I've been using Ubuntu for the constantly since the 10.04 LTS Lucid Lynx release. I've just stop using Ubuntu for a about 4 mouths, when I tried the cinnamon shell variant of Linux Mint 17 LTS Qiana. Though I liked Linux Mint, it doesn't quite feel as right as Ubuntu does for me. The Unity shell fits the bill for me on how I expect my desktop to look and work. When the move was made from GNOME to Unity on the 11.04 Natty Narwhal release, I was somewhat doubtful about it. I really liked how GNOME work, even though it didn't feel as well as Unity does now. If there was a moment where I could have jump to another distro, it was then. After more of two years of using Unity, and seeing it getting better over time, I must admit that it was become my favorite shell out there. I freely admit that Ubuntu is far from per...

The first piece of software that took me on the long way away from Windows, and all proprietary software, was NeoPlanet . I came to it looking for an option for the now ubiquitous Internet Explorer that I still dislike with a passion. From NeoPlanet, I made the jump to Firefox (which still is my favorite web browser by a long shoot). With Firefox entered my keen interest and support for free and open source software(FOSS), which has led me make the jump to Ubuntu full time with the 10.04 LTS Lucid Lynx release. Even though I've given a try to Linux Mint (my second favorite distro, and the one I recommend to those who want to make the jump to GNU/Linux but want something similar to Windows.) and Fedora (my third favorite distro), Ubuntu still holds the top spot. Ubuntu is the OS that better suits me for the use I give my computer, while it doesn't get in the way of how I do things. Now even my smart phone is GNU/Linux, since it's running Android . I've been...

Reading this article at wired.com , there is a point that seems really good for me. There is a real need to change how code security audits are done, in order to catch bugs like like Shellshock a lot faster. Yet, I disagree with the tenant that the Linus's Law is a lie, since having more eye balls looking for bugs makes catching them more likely in a faster way. What happens with some project, as the article correctly points out, is that they just don't have enough people working on them to catch bugs as fast and effectively as possible. Which in core projects can be quite a big problem, since the impact of those bugs on security can be quite big and dangerous for users. This is why there is a urgent need to change how code audits are carried out, and a need to make software open so we have as many people as possible looking at the code. In a sense, what we need is to have better auditing tools being used as widely as possible to make code both better and with much le...

That you can now stream Photoshop to Chromebooks it's not just not a big win for Google, but to GNU/Linux at large. It means that now the idea that Photoshop could become available in other distros is not really all that crazy. That Adobe finally decided to bring the flagship photo editing software to GNU/Linux via Chromebooks is a big thing since it takes away another reason for not coming to GNU/Linux.  Most importantly, if it does well on Chromebooks Adobe might have an incentive to bring Photoshop some of the other major GNU/Linux distros like Ubuntu or OpenSUSE. If more people start moving to use Photoshop on GNU/Linux, it might the spark that GNU/Linux has been looking to really become a mainstream OS and not just something used a few. There will be a bigger set of people that now will be able to see, and use, a GNU/Linux distro as a viable option to use on daily basis to work with. I still temper my optimism with a grain of salt. It's a great first step, bu...

This article at fossforce.com got me wondering, do FOSSers are the only ones who "get" FOSS? While in some cases non FOSS users seem unable to get what FOSS is all about, most of the time it's more about not caring enough to even try to understand FOSS at all. Most people just want computers that work according to their expectations for whatever use they have for them. For them, that it works the way they expect it to work is all that matters and anything else is irrelevant. So far, the likes of Microsoft and Apple have done quite a good job giving people products that let people a familiar product that lets them work in a way that they feel comfortable with. Since they have this products that work as they come to expect, why care about much about what FOSS people arguments about how software must respects users freedoms? Let's face it, the whole argument for most users is not a technical one since most people don't really want to get that side of the so...

This article in infoworld.com, about the pros and cons that Apple face about open sourcing its new Swift programing language got me thinking that I'd love to see Apple coming to the FOSS community completely. I know there are many people at the FOSS community at large that, to say the least, hate Apple with a passion. And for the looks of it, Apple feels quite the same way about FOSS. But if Apple came to embrace the FOSS movement completely, the benefits for itself and the FOSS movement at large would be many and to good to ignore. For Apple, some advantages would be having access to a wider set of developers to work with them to make their software better. It would have more developers looking to make their software better in more ways than any one could think about now. Not only that, it could take advantage of developments that are being put forward at places outside itself a lot easier and faster that if does now. Developers would have a proven platform that is ...

If this SanDisk SD card can be paired with Chromebooks , suddenly having a Chromebook becomes an option worth considering for me. The main issue for me with having a Chromebook, is the internal storage capacity. Until now, most Chromebooks top at 64 GB is way lower than the amount of storage that I feel comfortable with. For me, the minimum size for the hard drive is 500 GB. This means, that an SD card with a capacity of 512 GB hits the mark quite nicely. As a plus, storing my data on an SD card means that it can be easier to move it around devices. With the local data storage issue solved, Chromebooks also have the benefit of price. They are cheaper, and most of them offer a great value for me since they are a perfect fit for my computing needs. I just need something to edit text, do some light work on spreadsheets, listen music and do light Internet browsing. All this can be done with ease with a Chromebooks, meaning that a Windows laptop might be an over kill. Sin...

I've been using Mobo smartphone(link in Spanish) running Android 4.1.2 for a couple of mouths now, and even though it's somewhat on the low end spectrum I've really liked Android as a whole. If anything, I don't really like that I can move some of the apps to my SD card so I can free the internal memory. Yet the device holds the apps I use the most, so I really don't this hasn't become much of an issue. Most importantly, the over all experience has been rather good. So much so, that I've become an Android fan. When time comes to get a new smartphone, I'll get one that comes with more internal memory. Basically I've come to realize that for what I use my smartphone, Android is the OS to go and I need one with more internal storage to better fit my mobile lifestyle. Most importantly on a personal level, is that now my laptop and smartphone are underpinned by GNU/Linux. My go to distro for my laptop has become Linux Mint, though I also rec...

It seems that Apple is happy to blame its users every time something wrong happens with any of its products, no matter what issue is found. Even though some of the blame can be placed on Apple's own security implantation , it's rather odd and insensitive to place the blame on users while the investigation is still ongoing. Even worse when it seems that such blaming games are the modus operandi of a company that prides itself of making the word's mos advanced desktop OS . Ever since the antenna gate , Apple seems rather to blame their users as people that can seem to be able to use their rather user friendly products than to accept mistakes. That really bugs me, I don't mind companies making mistakes from time to time if they admit them and correct them. But, blaming users is something that is not ethical to say the least. In this case, I want to know what was the part that software had to play and what are they going to do to fix it so that something like ...

That China it's looking into making GNU/Linux custom OS, is both something I look forward to and something that makes me worry quite a bit. The good part of China moving to GNU/Linux, is that it has the potential to make other countries to look into GNU/Linux as well. Even if not all who do look into it fully migrate to open source software, which would be the ideal thing to happen, it could mean that at least some of their IT moves to it. Like it or not, China has a lot of sway. Moving to GNU/Linux might start a domino effect not only with some of the other BRIC nations, but with people that do business with the second largest economy. Besides, since it has a population of over 1.35 billion people will have an enormous impact on the economy of scale to produce hardware that supports GNU/Linux and open source software in general. The part that makes me worry, is that China isn't known to go by the spirit of open source. Hopefully, China will see the benefit of adh...

Reading this blog post entitled Work and open source , made me ponder about how to monetize open source projects. Though he's right that not all projects are abandoned because of financial issues; the important thing is what financial issues cause open source projects to stop being maintained. While Gittip seem to be a good tool to monetize some open source projects, it might not be the answer for every project out there. For me, Gittip seems to be a better fit for those projects that individuals use for whatever reason. It gives people a way to personally tip the developers for their hard work, while making contributions bigger by funneling a large sum from different sources in a single place. Another idea I like, and agree with, would be to GitHub to help the ones who use it to monetize their projects directly on the site. By adding a monetizing service to their site, GitHub stands at the chance of becoming an even more valuable tool for developers. Neither Gittip ...

It seems that this article at arstechnica.com about KDE misses the point about whats going on the GNU/Linux camp, in a sense that it's not about the kernel itself. It's about the desktop environment. What's going on, is that there seems to be a race toward convergence. Trying to have an user interface that's pretty much the same on the PCs, tablets and smart-phones. On the GNU/Linux camp, the main example that come to my mind is Canonical's Unity user interface . The main debate it's about how best convergence can be achieved, or if something that can be done. Some argue, like KDE's Aaron Seigo at this article at themutk.com , that convergence isn't coming at all. Even though I'd like to see full convergence across all platforms, I agree that it wont happen. In a sense, I think that we'll have some level of convergence. Yet, that convergence wont be on the user interface, but on the standards used to run software so we can actually ...

As with many things in life, the hardest thing to do with any FOSS (free and open-source software) project is manage it so that it doesn't get sidetracked from it's goal and to get things done. In many cases, FOSS projects that have sound technical foundations fail because their resources where mismanaged or they lost focus because of it. Sometimes it's because of both, which is a shame. The reason why Red Hat , LibreOffice , Firefox , and even Canonical , have had the success is due they have been well managed. These companies have brought together the technical expertise and the vision, and their management have made the right choices to keep true to them. So, they have arrived to the success they enjoy now. Yet, as Mozilla has shown, finding the right people to lead the project forward can be somewhat tricky to say the least. Specially since many FOSS project depend on their communities to take it forward. In a way, the management of some FOSS projects ...

With examples of the UK government choosing the ODF standard, or Geneva bringing open source software to their schools, are victories that help open source advocates to make the case for wider adoption of open source software and open standards. In both cases, shows how the benefits are to many to ignore and are quite enough incentive to make the move. The savings on the money that has to be paid in royalties, and for the right to upgrade are considerable. Not only that, at UK case it means that people can access government information without any cost imposed to them just to look said information because they can access it from any suite they choose. As this article at cnet.com about LibreOffice points out, now people don't have to pay Microsoft for their office suite to be able to access public documents. Whats best, there are several other office suites that can be used to access public documents saved on the ODF format, while being able to handle old Microsoft'...

This article at infoworld.com got me thinking, Tizen failed because it's open source model or because it was badly managed? It seems to me that the failure of Tizen has to do more with how the project has been managed so far, rather than with it being open source software. With Samsung betting heavily on Android, and Intel getting its hands on whatever OS can make its chips relevant, Tizen really had much chance to succeed. As with proprietary software projects, open source projects success depend heavily on how the leader of the projects manage them. On both sides, there are far more projects that fail than those who become success stories. Neither development process comes with a warranty of success attached with it, since there are many factors that can determine if a project will be a success or a failure. Trying to pin the blame on the open source development of Tizen, is quite shortsighted. As it states, the failure of Tizen is more a matter of strategy than of ...

This arstechnica.com article highlights a point that I think is something of a shortsighted view of the integration of software and business processes. It's the choice between choosing to modify the software or the business processes, so that they integrate in a way so that they add value. There is no single answer, the reality is that each project is different from each other. As such, when the upgrade is being done one should map out when is modifying the software or the business process will bring the most value. In short, choose to modify the one that has to adapt to the other in order to make things work to the best of their capabilities. It's also important to have in mind that, sometimes you're going to have to modify both in order to achieve the results you're looking for at the end. That's why having a clear idea of how you're doing things, and the results you want to achieve. Only with this in mind, and fully mapped out, you can make the ...

That Apple and Google are herding their users toward vendor lock in this arstechnica.com article describes, which spells bad news for users. Even for those who still aren't on either of those ecosystems, since they will be forced to pick a side if iOS and Android as become even more dominant players on the smart phone market place. Even though Apple isn't that big on the desktop, it can herd some users to their computers if they make it hard enough to use the iPhone along with Microsoft Windows or Google's Chrome OS. The same goes for Android, that could have an easier way of locking people in since more OEM have access to their mobile OS. Users should be the one who choose if they want to use devices from just a single vendor, or use a mix of devices from as many vendors as they choose. That's why vendor should always use a common standard as a platform, so that interoperability between all our devices becomes the norm independently of the software that e...

This column in wired.com made a good point about why people can't really share their files easily, and why it took so long for an app that lets you do that to come along. Most often that not, it seems like the interest of corporations trump the interest of the people when it comes to sharing files. What's more disturbing, is the fact that in some cases governments side with corporations so that governments can control the flow of information. Thus, it becomes a lot easier to censor all that the power want to keep from the public. While I believe that an app like onionshare and Tor project are available to the public, it also bothers me that they are not all that friendly to people who don't have that much technical know-how to make use of these tools. For must people, just entering to their sites to see what they are about might be a turn down to adopting them. Now more than ever, there is a real need for projects that make this kind of apps that are easy t...

If it wasn't bad enough that the NSA was collecting data wholesale, without missing much, is plain wrong. But targeting readers of the Linux Journal , while labeling them as extremist takes the whole thing to a whole level of paranoia that it's really unsettling. As a regular reader of the Linux Journal , I take offense that I could be labeled as a suspect and my movements tacked just because I've an interest on their content because it's interesting and useful for me as a GNU/Linux user. Not only on the tips on how to keep my privacy, but to get news and to stay up to date on whats going on. I wouldn't be surprised if there are some people that are up to no good use information they find on the site for their wrong doing. Yet, I'm quite sure that most of us who access the site are either GNU/Linux professionals or enthusiasts that find the content useful and interesting. As such, it serves as both a forum to discuss whats new, or just have an interest...

Is technology the silver bullet that will change the world? The answer is not as simple isn't a yes or no, it's actually a lot more complicated than that. In itself, technology is not the answer, is just the tool we have to make our world a better place. The truth, is people have to change the world. Technology is just a tool we have at our disposal to make change happen, for better or for worse its impact will depend on the use we give to it. As many things in life, technology will change our lives and we will have an impact on how technology evolves by the way we use it. What we believe, our habits, and social structure that exist when a certain technology arrives have a role on how it's received and used. It has a huge impact on how widespread it's adoption it will be, and it's not always easy to measure on the early days of it's release to the public. In a way, technology will not bring paradise to us. Instead, it's the tool that can help us...