FOSS has a big issue of perception...

One of the biggest problems I face when explaining FOSS(Free and Open Source Software) to people that haven't heard of it before, is one of perception.

Many seem to perceive FOSS as meaning that it will cost no money. Not only that, it seems that some think that all software that is given away for free is FOSS.

Nothing farther than the truth. If any software is to be considered FOSS, it most respect these user freedoms:

• Freedom 0: The freedom to run the program for any purpose.
• Freedom 1: The freedom to study how the program works, and change it to make it do what you wish.
• Freedom 2: The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor.
• Freedom 3: The freedom to improve the program, and release your improvements (and modified versions in general) to the public, so that the whole community benefits.

Note that price is not an issue, since anyone can charge for the software they made if it complies to giving users the freedoms mentioned above. Without respect for these freedoms no piece of software can be truly be considered FOSS, regardless of the price.

Other issue, is that many seem to assume that the quality of any software developed under FOSS will be low. Seems that many don't know that software like Firefox are open source, not to mention that most of the Internet traffic passes trough GNU/Linux based servers.

Another area where FOSS software can prove it's worth, is that it powers almost all the most powerful supercomputers used to advance science and technology. 

In more ways that one, it seems that the most important issue holding widespread adoption of FOSS is one of perception. The quality and robustness of FOSS has been long being proven, now there is a big need to change how people thinks of FOSS.

CentOS gains entry to the Red Hat family...

The news that CentOS joins the Red Hat family is actually good news, and in many ways underpins the benefits of being open source.

What CentOS has always given to Red Hat, is the power of collaboration to make it's product better. What this deal means, is that now almost all the work of putting those collaboration efforts now can be made under the same roof with official support.

I hope that this deal makes CentOS better, since Fedora is a good example that the deal could be beneficial not only for the parties directly involved. If all goes smoothly, it should be beneficial for the open source community at large.

Any way, Red Hat could keep CentOS free and still make a profit.

Retina display is a high definition display...

When I heard a coworker saying that Apple's relied solely on GPU's for it's resolution I was kind of expecting for him to be joking, since he does know about computers.

Yet, he really didn't know that the GPU was only part of the game. It seems that he doesn't know that the display also plays a major role for the the high definition that Apple's computers support. Not only that, he was at a lost on the fact that support for such high definition could be implemented on GNU/Linux and Windows.

The key part is that the ability to run high definition is not only based on hardware, you also need the software to support it. If the OS you run doesn't have the implementation to run high definition, you won't get it no matter how many GPU's you have nor the fact that you have a display that supports it.

The fact that Mac OS X looks the way it does has to do with the fact that the display supports the high pixel density needed. It helps to have a GPU to help run the show, but you still need the high definition display to be able to run have that level of resolution.

Thoughts on cracking...

One thing that has been making my mind spinning, is the comments made by some people casually talking about cracking software. It basically turned around the fact that it was cheaper than buying the original, or they did it just to feel that they could out do the security of the software they cracked.

What bothered me somewhat, is the fact that one of them didn't seem to be bothered at all about stealing the hard work of other. On the other hand, that the price of that software is keeping people from using such a powerful tool as the computer can be.

Both sides of the matter are plain wrong, since they mean that people don't really benefit either from the hard work they did on making the software. Meanwhile, the price means that they simply can't afford to learn series of skills that are needed in a world where computers are ever more integrated to our daily activities at work and at play.

Yet, free and open-source software(FOSS) is a viable alternative to prevent having to use cracking software, while giving people the chance to afford a computer with all the modern tools they need to learn the skills they would ever need. It empowers, both developers and users, to have a legal and affordable way to access the software they need use without having the cost barriers  that proprietary software imposes to them.

It's not just about money, it's about being ethical and fair on how we treat others work while having the software tools needed to be able to learn the skills needed to work and play.

There are alternatives out there that can be used without having to use to cracking on 

software. We need to extend their use, and let people know that they exist and that they can be as easy to use as the software they currently use.

Project: Community Computers, an example to follow...

One in a while I come across projects like Project: Community Computers really make my day. But this project in particular peaks my interest more than usual, because it's an example on how open source can be a great tool to make a difference on peoples life by providing them with the tools they need to have a better future.

The freedom that FOSS(Free and Open-source Software) gives to organizations like Project: Community Computers, is quite impressive and not easily dismissed. It grants them the opportunity to do great things, be the agent of change they need to be in our society.

The combination of people doing something to help other and FOSS, is one that I want to see being replicated a lot more. We need to give those people the tools they need to build themselves a better future, without chaining them to a particular software or hardware. They already face to many obstacles, so why burden them with another if we can avoid it?

All software, and the hardware it runs on, should be at the service of the people who use it. If it imposes any restriction on how, and where, it can be used it doesn't fulfill  the service it should be doing for the people who use it. The people who actually use it, should be the one making all decisions in every respect on the software.

In other words, people should completely own the software they run. Companies can't have a say on how we use the software once it's on our hands.

That's why projects like Project: Community Computers are so important. If you can, please help the project to reach their goal.

Firefox OS finally comes to Mexico...

This weekend I saw that a two smartphones using the Firefox OS just arrived to Mexico, via Movistar. They are priced at $999.00 MXN, or about $75.79 USD, which is priced quite well for someone like me.

Yet, what I like the most about having a couple of smartphones running the Firefox OS, is that now there are two open source mobile OSes available on the market. Which is great news for people like me, like want open source software to power their devices.

Until now, if you wanted an open source OS you had to go to Android. The only choice was which make and model you could pick, which is not that bad but not enough for my taste. With Firefox OS, you get more room to select what's better for you. Yes, there are only two devices running it on a single carrier, but I hope that it soon will extend to more manufactures and other carriers.

At least now, I'm pretty sure I'll make the jump to Firefox OS on the Alcatel One Touch Fire model.

The Internet does not solve anything, it enables the solution...

One of the main reasons why the Internet should be free and open all humanity, is because it has become one huge library of human knowledge. As such, it's one of the most important tools to share and access that knowledge in the easiest and efficient way by all.

While it's true that the Internet in itself won't ever solve anything, it gives people access to the necessary information to be able to solve what they need to. Also, by allowing people to share information with each other in an while not having to be at the same place at the same time it empowers individuals to be an agent of change.

As with books, television and radio, the Internet is just a channel by which information flows. The main difference is that the Internet that flow goes not only to the person consuming that information, the person can actually interact with that information in many ways. And many of those interactions can be in ways that the originator didn't intended.

The Internet is constantly evolving, changing and adapting to what and how people. It's a reflection of what the humanity does in real time, and many respects that Internet is as chaotic as we. We change the Internet as much as the Internet changes us, each passing day Internet and humanity are becoming ever more integrated. It's hard, almost impossible, to say where any of this is going to take us.

I only hope we can master the greatest tool for change for the better.