Information is out there...

Nowadays that information is at the fingertips of so many people, it's hard to believe that it's still not accessible to everyone. There is still a significant large groups of people who don't have access to the Internet, or to other information technologies, with all the benefits that come with having such an access.

We still have some way to go before we can say we have a 100% coverage, but as a whole we are getting closer.

There some power groups that fear that everyone has access to modern communication technologies for various reasons. Still, we need to have everyone aboard, if we want want to truly change things. We need to give everyone access to participate at least on the subjects that are interest each individual at any time.

Those who fear universal access to modern the modern technologies aren't just government, some corporations and politicians don't have people freely exchanging information and views about them. Not only because of profits, but they don't want to lose the power and control over our lives they have built over time. If people become aware of their dealing, and get the power to do something about it, they stand to lose more than just money.

Nothing give more power than knowledge, and the ability to share it. As such, governments and corporations want to keep people on the dark. At the same time, it's easier then ever to spread knowledge among the people.

People can organize themselves in a practical way, we don't depend anymore on centralized bodies to give us a picture of whats going around us. The people can choose where to go to get news, and have more sources to decide and make up their mind about things. The truth is out there, still it requires some effort to get to it.

Now more than ever, power is coming to the hands of the people to be used by the people. Things are going to change, it has become a question of when, not of if its going to happen.

Changing music listening habits...

I've been using Spotify for about a year and a half now, mainly when I didn't want to listen to the music I've at my hard drive. Also, when I want to explore new artists or tracks.

Yet, for the last couple of months now I've been using Spotify's Android app heavily. I use it at work, to give me some music the I like to have as background, and it gives a wider variety of music than radio would. And though I've my music collection on my smartphone, I prefer Spotify for when I just want music I love at the background.

Having my whole music collection and Spotify at my device sure has changed my music listening habits while I'm on the go. I used to mainly use Spotify and the fm radio app, but since I got a micro-SD card capacity enough to store all my media on it I virtually stop using the fm radio app.

I jump between the music app and Spotify depending on my mood, where I am or with who. Though I've Spotify on my laptop, I find myself using it on my smartphone.

My use of radio has been really reduced to just listening to the news. For music, I turn to Rhythmbox(on the desktop), Spotify(both on the desktop and smartphone), and Android's music app. I found that this combinations suits my lifestyle the best. It give the kind of flexibility I expect and a level of freedom I didn't have before.

At the end, both ways of listening to music are complementary and mix well. I believe in the future will be a seamless combination of both, allowing to jump between both areas without giving it a second thought.

Seems that Nokia could be making a come back...

Nokia used to be my favorite mobile phone manufacturer for several years, since I liked the devices themselves and Symbian was my favorite smartphone OS.

When Nokia made the deal with Microsoft to produce only smartphones using Windows Phone OS, since Android seemed to be a better option. With time, Nokia's choice became its downfall, since Android along with Apple's iOS have become the dominant smartphones OSes.

Yet, it seem that Nokia's has licensed to bring back the brand to the smartphone arena. The new smartphones and tables will come with Android, which it makes sense. The only misgiving I've, is that the market is already somewhat crowed. As such, the devices they bring have to be the right mix of quality and price to be able to take hold.

Personally, I'm happy and interested to see what offering they bring to the market. If they continue with the good quality of the smartphones produced under Nokia's brand, powered by Android, it should prove a good and competitive combination.

Guessing that the price range will be from mid to high ranges, though I wouldn't be surprised if some entry level devices are offered as well.

I hope that they will come through, since it would be the come back of my favorite smartphone brand powered by my favorite mobile OS.

Ubuntu is my go to OS...

While I'm an Ubuntu user, and fan, I've done some distro hopping. I've used Linux Mint, Fedora, Ubuntu Mate and openSUSE, yet I always come back to Ubuntu.

While at work I use Windows 7, I feel more at home on Ubuntu. Ubuntu just works for me, while is the Linux distro that I personally find most aesthetically pleasing. The two Linux distros I recommend are Ubuntu and Linux Mint, on that order, since they are the ones that work best out of the box.

I know that Ubuntu is not the OS that will be a fit for everyone, that's where the strong point of Linux is. There is a distro that is focused on your needs, so it will allow you to work the way you want.

The best OS for you, is the one that disappears on the background allowing you to focus on the app that you are using at the time. Ubuntu does that for me, it allows me to concentrate on what I'm doing at the time. No matter what I'm doing, I can focus at the task at hand.

The Unity user interface allows me to focus on what I doing at a level where I don't have to think about what the Ubuntu is doing, it just blurs on the background. Cinnamon comes close, but I don't feel as comfortable using it as I do Unity.

I don't believe that Ubuntu is the answer for everyone, but it's a good place to start if you want to use a solid Linux distro. The other one would be Linux Mint, but that depends on your personal preferences.

At the end of the day, is about using an OS that respect your freedoms as an user and fits what you need. So, don't be afraid of doing some distro hopping to find the Linux distro that fits your needs.

Android is the mobile OS for me...

I started using Android about two years ago, after using a Blackberry Bold and an Nokia E63. So far, I've had three different devices that run Android and I've really enjoyed using the OS so far.

My current device is a MOBO MB400(Spanish and its a PDF), and so far it's the one I like the most. It has enough RAM, and with an 16GB Micro SD card, has more than enough power for the use I give.

With it, I found that for me a 4" screen is the sweet spot for me. It's big enough for what I use my smartphone for, while fitting my hand as a glove. I used a 5" MB505(Spanish and its a PDF) for about 6 months, and it never stopped feeling somewhat awkward to use for me.

Before coming to use Android, I was somewhat weary about making the jump. Mainly because I really liked the physical keyboard on the Blackberry, and the Android devices with a physical keyboard weren't all that good.

But after talking to some friends about their experience using Android, I decided to make the jump. And since, I haven't looked back and Android is my go to mobile OS.

While the Blackberry Priv was an option for me, since it is an Android device made by a company known for making solid devices with a physical keyboard, I keep coming back to MOBO devices since they give me the best value for the price.

Most importantly, MOBO devices are unlocked. Meaning that I can use them with any mobile carrier I choose to.

At the end of the day, the combination of Android and MOBO is one that fits with what I value most. That is, user freedom to choose the device and mobile carrier that better fits her or his needs.

So, I'm on Android camp for my mobile OS.

There are options for unlocked smartphones...

The first smartphone OS I came in contact with was Symbian on a Nokia E63, then I used BlackBerry OS on a BlackBerry Bold. I had good user experiences with both, though with the BlackBerry Bold, my carrier tried to force me to a contract to use cellular data.

So, when I came to my first Android device, I was somewhat uncertain about not having a physical keyboard. Other than that, I've had heard only good things about the OS and it runs all the apps I prefer. So, making the jump to Android made a lot of sense for me, since the other viable options are Apple's iPhone running iOS or a Windows Phone, both options that don't resonate with me for philosophical reasons.

I decided to try a MOBO(site in Spanish) device, mainly because they sell vanilla unlocked Android devices. Currently I'm on my 3rd device, a MOBO MB400. I used a MB500 before, which had lasted 6 months, since the battery got busted because of short circuit and it wasn't user replaceable. Other than that, I was quite happy with it. The first MOBO device I had was a MOBO Hyper, an entry level smartphone that was quite good.

Ever since, I've been an Android fan for my mobile OS. While at the time I got my first Android device I was considering getting one with Firefox OS, getting an unlocked Android device really sold Android to me. Though I still miss a physical keyboard, mainly because of nostalgic reasons, Android has won me over because if goes well with my lifestyle.

MOBO has won me over as my favorite smartphone distributor, since it's devices are unlocked. As such, I can use them with the cellular carrier of my liking, and change to another carrier if I choose so without the hassle of having to change my device as well.

While MOBO devices don't come with the latest and greatest Android, they do offer a reasonable modern Android version with some nice hardware. Unless you have some special needs, MOBO has you covered.

The Android/MOBO combination has me covered. The main thing for me, is the freedom of choice the combination gives me; and that it as close it's practical to my views on free software as you can get now.

Local storage, streaming and cloud computing are complementary...

There is no doubt that cloud computing and streaming media are here to stay. It's quite an useful tool, there is no question about that, since it allows a level of collaboration not seen before. Besides, it allows to share data among several people or devices in a much convenient way.

Yet, I don't see everyone going completely to the cloud. While having some files in the cloud, or using some streaming services is something almost everyone use for practical reasons, sometimes local storage is a better option.

On the streaming media side, there is some music, movies or series we like but not enough to own a physical copy. As such, we are content enough with having a service that will make it available to us on demand. At the end, we'll own just the media we love enough to have a copy from stored at our hard drive or other physical medium like a CD, vinyl  album or DVD.

That's way I see that most people using a mix of local and cloud storage.

Everyone likes, and needs, to disconnect from time to time. That's why local storage will be used, to have access to those files, audio and video that a person might want to have access at any moment online and offline. Even though at some point all of our lives will be digitized, individuals will make make use of local and cloud.

The main reason for this is that even though we like to share things with others, we don't want or should share everything. So, there is a limit of how much and for what we'll use cloud and streaming services. That limit is different for everyone, but it's there.

At the end of the day, cloud computing and streaming have a place in our daily lives. Yet, it won't replace local storage completely, as they'd complement each other.

FOSS is as good, or better, as proprietary software...

When someone ask how FOSS(Free and open-source software) can be any good, I just have to point them to Firefox or LibreOffice. Both are FOSS apps that are cross platform, meaning that why run on Windows, Mac OS X and Linux, that are FOSS and are really good apps that anyone can use.

There are many other FOSS examples to give. On the OS level there are Ubuntu(which is my favorite) and Linux Mint, and other apps include GIMP to edit images, Kino an video editing app, Pitivi a non-linear video editing app, or Rhythmbox as an audio playback app.

Granted that there isn't a substitute for every proprietary out there, yet with every passing day this is less of a trouble. As of now, I'm quite certain that there is an FOSS alternative for almost every user. Personally, I've been using Ubuntu or Linux Mint for almost 6 years now and I haven't run into any significant problem that can't be easily solve by a Google search.

As I said, if someone isn't ready to jump to a Linux distro to go fully FOSS they can still have access to good FOSS apps like Firefox, Thunderbird, or Clementine that can be used Windows and Mac OS X.

As time goes on, its becoming harder not to come by, and support, FOSS in some way. Even if you can't use an FOSS OS, there are FOSS apps that can be used on proprietary OSes to begin with.

Yet, FOSS is better since it respects users freedoms. There is no good reason, or real one, to forgo these freedoms. All of the reasons given no to use FOSS are FUD(fear uncertainty and doubt) tactics, not based on any real issues.

FOSS is as safe, if not safer, than proprietary software. And just as good, if not better.

Ubuntu 16.04 LTS(Xenial Xerus) holds as my favorite OS...

As an Ubuntu, and fan I must confess, every six mouths is a good time since I get a new OS. This time around, I couldn't contain myself and upgraded to Ubuntu 16.04 LTS a few days earlier than usual.

I've been using it for almost a week, and so far I do feel that the Xenial Xerus(the code name for the 16.04 release) is really a good one. I've encountered no significant bug do far. It actually it seems to be a step forward from Ubuntu 15.10 even though it's a conservative one since Ubuntu 16.04 is a Long Term Support release.

While is a boring release in terms of features added, for me it has been a good one. I do see my laptop a bit being faster, and in some cases being quite more stable. Not that 15.10 gave any more trouble, it just feels like LTS version is just polishing some of the rough edges of the OS.

Ubuntu 16.04 is turning out to be a solid release for those who need an OS that will have a relative long life(for five years), and a nice upgrade for those of us that like Ubuntu.

I'm an user who likes to upgrade every time there is a new version of Ubuntu, since for my needs Ubuntu has software that might not as bleeding edge as in other distros, but is stable enough for everyday use. As such, for my needs Ubuntu has the right balance for me.

While I'd love to have seen Unity 8 on this release, I can see why Canonical decided to stick with Unity 7 for a LTS release. Unity has become quite a solid graphical shell, sticking to a proven version for a LTS release makes sense, at least until the next version proves itself stable enough.

Other than that, Ubuntu is still my go to Linux distro. It's still one of the distros I recommend to beginners and Linux users that want a distro that just works.

Validating open source development...

As this article at techrepulic.com points out, Microsoft has been opening up to open source and Linux because it needs them to stay relevant. It's more of a pragmatic move, rather than Microsoft changing it's hearth about open source software.

The irony is not lost on me, but I'm happy about it all because it validates what the open source movement stands for. No matter what Microsoft says, Linux has shown that open source development of software is the way to go to develop software successfully.

That even Facebook, Google, and Apple do open source in some way, gives even more credit to the open source development model in both hardware and software development. Even if they do it on behalf on their interests, at the long run it helps everyone that they open to everyone their designs. Not only that, they benefit themselves, since any improvement made by anyone would also benefit them by allowing them to use it to improve their machines as well.

In some way, it was a matter of time that the open source development model would be validated. It has been more a question of when and how, never if it would happen.

The irony resides in the fact that Microsoft is doing so, even if it isn't what the company intended to happen. They had to validate open source software in some way to remain relevant, even if they don't explicitly advocate it. In a way, they are giving users motives to use open source software or at least see that software developed as open source is a valid option.

Yes, it might not be the best way to bring forward open source software. Yet, it gives open source software an opportunity to shine on a wider stage and for a bigger audience. It's up to us to take the moment, and make the best out of it.

Encryption is vital for any full and healthy democracy...

I'm not paranoid, or into doing anything unlawful, but I don't like the idea of anyone being able to eavesdrop into my conversations. So the fact that WhatsApp just added end-to-end encryption, is something I really appreciate.

Encryption has to do more with privacy, than with the ability to do crimes. It's more about keeping your private conversations that way, without having to worry about any third party getting into them. Each individual, has the right to keep things private and only share what he, or she, wants with those he chooses.

The computers, and other electronic devices, we own are meant for private use. As such, only the information we choose to share publicly should be considered to be at the public square. And that we choose to share on private channels should remain private.

Encryption is vital to the ability of individuals to be able to keep private information that way. As such, any healthy democracy should allow full use of encryption to their citizens. Even going as far as granting use of it should be a right granted to all of us, since encryption it's vital to privacy.

As such, citizens should be able to make full use of encryption on the services they use. Not to mention that their devices should have encryption on by default, so that we can have a reasonable level of confidence that our private information remains only available to those who we choose to share it with.

Privacy and encryption go hand in hand in our modern world, and encryption should be built into all communication, and personal electronic devices, that people use for private communications. There is a difference between our private and public lives, and that difference needs to be respected.