Open source software and standards role in the government...

If we want a truly open and transparent government, all it's to relay on open standards and open source software.

The reliance on proprietary software, and closed standards, would mean that the government would be at the mercy of a particular vendor or whoever hold the rights to the patents to the the standard. This is unacceptable, since the government shouldn't have to be subject to such limitations.

What's more, every we all have the right to study the software that the government uses to see how it works and to make sure that it does what the government says it does. After all, we all have to interact with it, and need to be certain that it does what it made for in the best way possible.

On the open standards, one of the main reasons to use them is the fact that all should be able to access the government's platforms without any limitation artificially imposed by a third party. By using open standards, government could make sure that all the people have equal and fair access to its platforms.

Most importantly, the government should be laying the frameworks for open standards, and creating an environment in which open source to become the norm. In our digital world, open source software and open standards need to be the foundation to make sure that we all have access to it in a level playing field.

After all, the government has to represent the interest of the people.

Swift being released as open source is a good thing...

That Apple is to open source it's Swift programming language, and that it will have support on Linux, is some good and welcome news.

Swift is becoming popular fast, and it seems there are lot of good reasons for it to gain popularity. And that it's backed by a company like Apple, should give people the reassurance that it won't lack support in the long term.

Even though I admit some suspicions on why Apple moved to open source Swift, I do welcome the idea to have such a tool for open source developers to use to work with. Specially because it could be a good place for beginners to learn to code, making it less intimidating to learn a skill that is becoming ever more relevant in the modern world.

One of the things that Apple does well, is good software. While it's true that it has an iron grip on it, one has to admit that the quality of it is high. Many of the criticisms out there about Apple's software have more to do with the way it manages it, and the way development goes along.

I'm cautious and excited about this development, but I'm hopeful it will a positive thing for Apple and the open source community.

The open source model is about collaboration...

If you need that the open source model not only works on software, but that it can be adapted to other areas go ahead and read this article at Arstechnica.

At the core of the open source model is not sharing for the sake of sharing, but collaboration among people that have a common problem that need to be solved. By allowing collaboration with other people, with whom one normally wouldn't have the chance to do so. Since the network of people working on a common platform on the same problem, the time needed to solve problems and ending with a mature design, is reduced by a wide margin.

By adopting an open source model, the benefits out weight the cons that can be encountered by using it. Most importantly, you can concentrate more on differentiating your product rather than on solving the same design problems others are working on or have been already solved.

With more time to work on the details that you need to work on to give your target market asks of your product, gives you a better chance to be successful by getting to your gaol more efficiently. The open source model gives you a way to tap on the expertise and experience of others, in a way that no other model can.

The best work comes out of collaboration, and people just need the right platform to be able to collaborate in a way allows them to solve the problems that they are facing by working with others that have what they need.

It won't always work as intended, but that is part of doing things. Yet, if the platform is managed in way that actually helps people to work together and collaborate in a way that allows them to get things done, the success ratio should be one that makes it sustainable.

Back to Linux Mint, and liking it...

After having some trouble with Ubuntu not turning off, or suspending, properly on a Gateway NEseries laptop I decided to move on to another Linux distro.

The fist one I decide to give a try, was Kubuntu. I've heard great things of the distro itself, and the KDE Plasma Desktop user interface.

Though I liked the distro, and KDE, I still had the same troubles I did and KDE didn't do much for me as a user. In someways, I didn't feel as comfortable with KDE as I did with Unity and just couldn't get up to speed or get KDE to my linking.

So, I decided to move back to an old known distro. I jumped back to Linux Mint with Cinnamon as the user interface. I'm using 17.1 Rebeca, and I remembered why Linux Mint is, along with Ubuntu, my top pick of Linux distros.

All in all, I found that Cinnamon 2.4.8 to be a lot more mature and stable. As such, I haven't had any of the bugs I used to encounter jumping at me. The best thing, is that the system as a whole so stable that I've come up to speed faster that I thought.

Since I'd been using Unity for about two year before coming back to Cinnamon, that is to be expected. Yet, both user interfaces have become my favorites and I recommend them full heartedly.

The same goes for Ubuntu and Linux Mint, both are rock solid distros. The choice between them would be more of what specific computing needs and personal tastes.