Unity...

So, the release date of Ubuntu 12.04 LTS is coming near. I'm really looking forward to updating my system, since most of the reviews I've read so far on the betas are quite good.

It seems that, as usual with a LTS version, is going to be a pretty polished release. Mainly, the updates to Unity are the ones that I'm most interested in. Since Unity came up with Ubuntu 11.04, it has come to be my favorite desktop environment because it's looks and the way it works.

I've found that Unity adjust better to what expect from a desktop environment, and how I work. And since, for my tastes, it looks really nice I enjoy using it.

After I get to use Ubuntu 12.04 LTS for a while, the only doubt I have is if I'll stick to updating just when a LTS version of Ubuntu comes out or I keep updating every time.

Both have frequencies have their advantages. With the LTS versions one gets the chance to have a more polished OS, and in some cases the applications are a lot more stable. On the other hand, updating with every new version you get the latest versions of the Linux kernel and some other more advanced features.

So far, Ubuntu has come to be my favorite distro by far. I don't really have any plans to jumping to another distro any time soon.

Sharing control and responsability...

I don't think that control should solely on the creators of the product, or on the hands of users. It should be shared, with both the creators and the users having a say on what happens on the product.

One could say that the level of control on the hands of the creators and users, should be variable depending on the stage of that the product is in. At the start, it's fine that the creators to have most of the control over their products and ideas; but when it hits the hands of the users, they should have most of the product.

As with many things in life, the answers are not on the extremes and we should have a certain level of flexibility when looking for answer. Yet, is really irksome that most people are really set in keeping things in a certain way.

Collaboration from the users should be encouraged by the creators of any product. By letting the users to contribute to their project, the final product will be a lot better than it could be if they only comes from their own efforts. Not only that, since users who actively contribute in some way to the projects that produce the things they use on daily basis are far more loyal to them and keep using them for longer periods of time. And when a new version of the product comes out, those users are more likely to help on the development and buy it afterwards.

Let's not forget that users and creators are human, and as such they all like to be taken into account. If creators really tapped into the creativity of their users, the end result would be orders of magnitude better that anyone could imagine. Basically the only rule there is, is to really listen to your users and use their ideas when they apply.

It's a shame that many companies don't use the collaborative energies of their users in order to create better products, and a loyal user base. Yes, there are negative aspects to have a more active users base collaborating in the development of the products. Yet, the positive side vastly outweigh them and gives far better results for everyone involved with the project.

People want to be part of a community. Instead of building companies, lets build communities that bring great products that its members can use.

Develop on the open...

I've trouble trusting any development that is done undercover and with no level of transparency to the public. It's a sure way to hide any troubles that may come with the new product, or hide features that are objectionable by any standard.

Most often than not, doing development like this is an easy way to hide something from the users. And if someone says something, he's usually hushed or sued in order to keep the information from any interested party or getting it fixed. Mainly because they are more interested in meeting the needs, or wants, of a small circle of people rather than the needs and wants of the actual users. Or even those who would be affected in other way by the product itself.

This makes it relevant to our interests to back those companies, or groups, that develop their products openly.

Any interested party should be able to check any part of the development process, and ask for changes. Even better would be for ways for changes to be proposed by anyone interested in bringing one forward.

Open collaboration in development processes should be the norm, since this way the interest of most of the people interested would be meet the first time around. Collaborating should be easy, and inactivated in order to bring people to bring proposals to the table.

It's important to take into account no one has all the answers, and other people can bring valuable skill sets, knowledge, and experience to the table. By closing the door to them, we are in fact wasting those valuable resources. And by extension, not giving our product the possibility to reach its full potential.

Not all proposals should be used, but they should be at least heard.

We all benefit from such collaboration. There is far more to win, than there is to lose.

Linux, as friendly as you want it to be...

One of the things I notice when I talk to friends and family about Linux, is that most of the time they believe that it's hard to use and that what you can do in it is somewhat limited.

Most of them seem intimidated by the idea of running an OS that's not Windows. Some have seen Ubuntu running on my laptop, and they seem confused that it isn't at all what they thought it would be. I mean, they see me running Firefox and Skype as it would on Windows and most often than not they seem a lot more interested in trying a Linux distro.

As a matter of fact, if they would ask me to set them a Linux machine for them I would set them with one running either Ubuntu or Linux Mint. I find that these two distros are far less intimidating for new Linux users, and offer all the functionalities that most people need for their computing.

Not only that, they are easy to use and the user interface is quite friendly, making them the ideal starting point for the average user coming to Linux.

And it helps that I know my way around both distros, since I've used both on daily basis. Yet, personally I'd recommend Ubuntu since it's my personal favorite. But there is one of the great thing about Linux, and the FOSS community at large, there is something that will adapt to your needs a lot better if you look for it. Not only that, the community behind it will be there to help if you run into trouble with a quick search.

I do recommend to move from Windows to a Linux distro, it'll be one of the best moves you can make computer wise.

Equilibrium...

When it comes to the hardware and software I use, I like it to have good looks and functionality. If one is missing, it's a deal breaker for me.

Since I'm going to be looking at it on daily basis, I don't want it to be an eye sore. And it has to be functional to be able to do some work on it, without having any component getting in the way.

A good design should combine both, good looks and functionality, in one package. To be honest, I'd always would pick functionality over looks but I want both if I can have them. Functionality makes is easy to do the tasks I've to do, and good looks makes me happy to be doing what I'm doing.

Yet, it seems that most of the time we have to select one over the other. Which is a shame, since both concepts can go hand in hand without diminishing the final product.

Sadly on the open source software community there is a tendency to fall on the utilitarian side, giving the aesthetics side little thought at best. It can be problem with many users, since not giving enough good looks can persuade many to overlook a piece of great software just because it didn't look good.

Making software look good, can bring users to it because they find it far easier to use and they like working on it. But just making it look pretty is also bad, since without functionality it would still be a piece of useless software.

Form should follow function, but there's always a way to making it look good. Striking the right balance is what separates good software, from great software that people actually want to use.

Arriving to the right balance, is more art that science. But, it can be achieved and getting there should be part of the goal.

Why I believe in open source...

I use open source software mainly because of ethical reasons reasons. There are some technical ones too, but in some aspects the ethical side came first.

Collaboration is between individuals is important to bring forth innovation, and humans are by nature social. A such, we have a need come together to share and exchange ideas. Anything that artificially puts barriers to collaboration should be avoided, instead we should be motivated to work together for common goals.

We also should be free to express our ideas and opinions openly, since this brings people together. By being exposed to the way other people think, we gain the knowledge and wisdom that otherwise we wouldn't have come about on our own.

Also by being able to see how things work, we get a better understanding of why and how things happen. By having this knowledge, we empower people to be less dependent on others and give them the chance to bring something of value back to the table.

By spreading knowledge we ensure our future, and give people tools that helps them to understand the world we live in. And also to bring people together, since we can learn from each other.

Knowledge is a common good, and everyone should have access to it. With it, we all can help to build a better world. The free flow of knowledge is one way we can ensure our survival, and move humanity forward. It gives power to all that posses it, and sharing it only makes it more valuable.

Sharing knowledge helps to perfect it, and to come with new ways to do things. By perfecting knowledge we perfect ourselves.

Bringing people together...

Smartphones, computers and tablets with Internet access are one of the most powerful tools to bring people together, and give the masses the ability to work together for common goals.

These devices give the average people access to information, tools and communities that otherwise the individual wouldn't be able to have. All these things together empower people, and makes it practical to actually organize on the grassroots level in order to achieve things that otherwise would be a lot harder to do.

Not only that, it humanizes people and as such helps us to empathize with them. All of the sudden, what happens in other places doesn't happen just to unknown people. Those people have faces and names, and we feel more readily compelled to give them a helping hand.

We are more aware of whats going on around us, for better or for worse. Since we know, action can be taken and other people can be made aware of the facts.

It truly helps to make our communities stronger, by bringing the people on the community closer together and letting the individuals to get to know each other. It breaches distances and time, people can interact in anyway they can think. We are only limited by our imagination, if we can think of it there is a way.

This is why it's so important to keep the Internet free and open. And our devices should be enable us to collaborate with others in a meaningful way.