The Problem With Linux & OSS in general

The problem with Linux and other FLOSS spin-offs can be neatly encapsulated in a few words � �a whole generation of users, trainers and strategic and policy makers (in the academia) have matured with seeing the Microsoft logo on the splash screen�. The author would like to mention at the outset that he has nothing per se against the corporation, however it says a lot about human nature that spoon-feeding has made it lazy and unwilling to unlearn.

The major market/purchaser for software is the government. Given the huge corpus of funds it can bring to the table, it is of no surprise that a vigorous amount of discounting policy should also be at work. Given the size of market inroads that can be achieved, dominant players usually have lenient terms when dealing with the government, both at state and national levels, or its various organs. From a business point of view the next major market, albeit niche, should be the academia. By this I mean the schools, colleges and universities with computer sciences in the course curricula and an active student roster. Unfortunately here is where the game gets a bit murky. Software licensing paradigm represented by Microsoft and like belong to the �proprietary� school of thought. This means that ownership of the software is with the vendor. The user-purchaser is vested with limited usability rights, and the licensing agreement is tenuous at best. Moreover, the licensing agreement when calculated for a per-seat basis leads to huge investments in infrastructure to set up a well-equipped and functionally viable lab. Given the amount of subsidies and cross subsidies in government-funded education, such outflow is not permitted. And in the growing number of private funded educational institutions such investment takes second place in the category of investments. Moreover, given the absurd pricing of the software, in many cases being a conversion price of their offshore rates (in foreign currency), software piracy is implicitly and tacitly encouraged. One should not stop from condoning the action, yet there are quite important reasons as to its rampant presence.

Of late the BSA-NASSCOMM alliance has managed to send out flyers and mailers to individuals culled from a particular database, announcing and encouraging whistle-blowers. With its in-place rewards policy and assurance of anonymity to the informer, this forms a very attractive package. While the results of this campaign are yet to roll in, it is obvious that some institutions are already feeling the heat. Encouraged by the success (es) in case of MIT, a few exemplary and punitive actions have managed to turn the focus on the FLOSS movement. Cases in point are Kalyani Govt Engg College etc (iLUG-Kolkata members are aware of such incidents). Yet such events have not managed to create a mass migration to FLOSS of GNU/GPL software platforms. Reasons for this are manifold, and this article will try to highlight some of them.

1. The diversity of Linux (or FLOSS) distributions leads to a richness of choice, which can be bewildering for the first time migration. Given that each platform/distribution has its own coterie of die-hard fans, it becomes difficult to take an unbiased considerate approach to the migration.
2. Easing the pain of transition � migrating from any environment to a new one requires some amount of slack time to adjust to. In case of migrating to a Linux system, a bit of ingenuity as well as intuition is required together with guidance and training.

The author is of the opinion that the first problem can be solved if a customized distribution based on a target audience profile is marketed. Schools and colleges with Computer Science courses have a very limited application requirement profile (a separate article will discuss the satisfaction of the syllabi). A distribution that addresses these demands should find a ready market. The distribution should be stable, secure, scaleable and suitably priced so as to fill the gap for a de-facto standard and uniform desktop distribution and at the same time be able to serve in a client-server environment.

The second problem is a bit difficult to address. In the first place, institutions willing to give software created under FLOSS a go should be made aware of the licensing regime. The most important factor that the licensing costs are greatly reduced should address the issue of financial control. Local Linux User Groups should actively participate in out-reach programs in tandem with educational institutions, holding demonstrations and technical presentations together with corporate presentations in order to remove the myths and misconceptions about the system. Given the latest releases of the various distributions as a baseline, a very slight difference on the GUI level can be detected with prevailing Microsoft and proprietary lines. This means that the classification should focus on the length of the bang for the buck as opposed to going into finer technical details. Installation fests could be organized using the school and college premises, so as to introduce and welcome more people into the fold.

More problems remain including training for the teachers, hardware problems that require to be addressed among others. A separate article is planned for these.

- posted by sankarshan @ 1/18/2003 05:30:00 AM