MESSAGE
| DATE | 2010-12-21 |
| FROM | einker
|
| SUBJECT | Subject: [NYLXS - HANGOUT] 2010: The Year in Free and Open Source Software
|
From owner-hangout-outgoing-at-mrbrklyn.com Tue Dec 21 12:40:16 2010
Return-Path:
X-Original-To: archive-at-mrbrklyn.com
Delivered-To: archive-at-mrbrklyn.com
Received: by www2.mrbrklyn.com (Postfix)
id 5DD9039581; Tue, 21 Dec 2010 12:40:16 -0500 (EST)
Delivered-To: hangout-outgoing-at-www2.mrbrklyn.com
Received: by www2.mrbrklyn.com (Postfix, from userid 28)
id 4E6593958D; Tue, 21 Dec 2010 12:40:16 -0500 (EST)
Delivered-To: hangout-at-nylxs.com
Received: from mail-ew0-f41.google.com (mail-ew0-f41.google.com [209.85.215.41])
by www2.mrbrklyn.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9065539581
for ; Tue, 21 Dec 2010 12:40:15 -0500 (EST)
Received: by ewy27 with SMTP id 27so2208186ewy.28
for ; Tue, 21 Dec 2010 09:40:22 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:date:message-id
:subject:from:to:content-type;
bh=LJ6TdP5VTl0XVkBZHZWFupUzLdb0CkfxhHcFozv9sqk=;
b=MmV6U2bEw57B599UKQ7/Cv4XS03E1A3O1Xr4WZiwhISZcigub3SWpelqkEySFLESww
ByfLbncmyU0A1jbCiVEyVSpcAU3d3nP5LFf/B13ah7MSZ1WJicxYzCSmf6TaQUFpPo6q
tS4lw1694x4/c5wZEoiesq/Vo+g9GrNC1Ym90=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type;
b=qtLLWhPdO08LcM30NZpD7L2Joibvj7FqWZCE4W8RGQ3GC8cKuSZFioYupP70UAfUv3
QXz3QTioSiqzxZv6mSArIvpKwr3MWmyde1g8d6JrXU50iP6Vjosnf5NzJMrBFPNrz9y/
/6rjj/djRtM3SAVZwQBMtz4aEPYjkXpkcGh5g=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.213.35.147 with SMTP id p19mr5068501ebd.19.1292953222646; Tue,
21 Dec 2010 09:40:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.213.108.129 with HTTP; Tue, 21 Dec 2010 09:40:22 -0800 (PST)
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2010 12:40:22 -0500
Message-ID:
Subject: [NYLXS - HANGOUT] 2010: The Year in Free and Open Source Software
From: einker
To: hangout-at-nylxs.com
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0015174c1c828c0e110497ef2147
Sender: owner-hangout-at-mrbrklyn.com
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: hangout-at-mrbrklyn.com
--0015174c1c828c0e110497ef2147
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
2010: The Year in Free and Open Source Software
By Bruce Byfieldagement.earthweb.com/osrc/article.php/3918011>
December 21, 2010
http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/osrc/article.php/3918011
To all appearances, 2010 was a year of business as usual in free and open
source software (FOSS). It was neither the long-awaited and derided Year of
the Linux Desktop, nor a year marked by any great reversals. However, some
of the trends that emerged in 2010 may become more important over the next
few years -- particularly the emerging tendency of corporations to comply
technically with FOSS licenses while ignoring their intent.
But in the short term, 2010 was marked by such a lack of drama that decidin=
g
whether FOSS advanced or retreated in 2010 is next to impossible. For bette=
r
or worse, here are some of the leading FOSS events and trends in 2010 for
business, technology, legal matters, and the community:
Business Moves and Directions
For those watching FOSS business, 2010 proved a mixed year. On the one hand=
,
Red Hat continued to thrive, to the extent that Forbes blogger Dan Wood
predicts/?boxes=3DHomepagechannels>that
the company will reach $1 billion in revenues next year.
On the other hand, other companies with FOSS interests showed signs of
struggling in 2010. Smaller companies such as Xandros, which have made
headlines in previous years, were quieter in 2010, and, if they enjoyed any
successes, they were quiet ones that went mostly unnoticed.
As for the major players, Canonical, the commercial arm of the dominant
Ubuntu distribution, continued to search for profitability in a distributio=
n
by adding cloud and music services, and laying the groundwork for expansion
into touch-screens. However, any success in these efforts is going to take
longer than a year to emerge.
Even worse, Novell, one of the major contributors to the Linux kernel and
other FOSS projects, was
soldhmate-corporation/>to
Attachmate, with some of its patents going to a
consortiumosoft-buy-Novell-patents-1155803.html>whose
members include Apple, EMC, Microsoft, and Oracle. Although
FOSS-related patents do not appear to have been involved, nobody knows yet
whether Novell's FOSS contributions will continue under Attachmate or not.
Similarly, 2010 also saw the finalization of Oracle's acquisition of Sun
Microsystem, which includes major FOSS projects such as Java, MySQL, and
OpenOffice.org.
Peter Brown, the executive director of the Free Software Foundation,
suggested to me that Oracle has still to develop a coherent free software
policy, but the decisions made by individual corporate units have caused
shockwaves throughout FOSS in the last year -- everything from a
campaignt-to-Save-MySQL-Interview-with-Monty-Widenius.htm>to
prevent Oracle's acquisition of MySQL by Monty Widenius to the forking
of
LibreOffice from OpenOffice.org (see below). Such reactions leave little
doubt that the community lacks confidence in Oracle as a steward for its
FOSS acquisitions.
Technology Trends
One piece of FOSS technology -- Google's Android mobile operating system --
thrived in 2010. Throughout the year, the sale of Android devices continued
to soar, with headlines telling us that sales were outstripping
manufacturing capability and that they were outselling the iPhone. This
success was mitigated by complaints about lack of openness in development,
and the use of Digital Rights Management technologies and proprietary Java.
All these things make Android a platform built on FOSS that has strayed
badly from its ideals.
Another Google project, the Chrome browser, enjoyed something of the same
success in 2010, rising to an 8% market share by November, and developing a
supporting set of extensions at the same time. This growth makes Chrome the
major competitor for Mozilla's Firefox, so that it is now currently setting
the agenda for browser development. Chrome is an essential element of the
soon to be released Chrome OS, whose design choices raise
issuesPlease-Dont-Open-the-Hood.htm>of
privacy and control, but is also available separately.
A lesser known, but equally important development in FOSS technology during
2010 is the development of the
Linux-librekernel.
Unlike the standard Libre kernel released by the kernel project and
most distributions, the Linux-libre kernel does not include proprietary
firmware blobs for device drivers, making it the most philosophically free
version of the kernel available. The Linux-libre kernel has been adapted by
a small but growing number of
distributions,
despite being several releases behind the latest standard kernel.
Recently, the idea of a free kernel received a major endorsement when
Debian, the largest independent community-based distribution,
announced-completely-free-linux-kernel/>that
its upcoming release would ship with a default free kernel. This
decision increases the likelihood of other major distributions providing a
free kernel as an option.
2010 also marked the start of a possible move away from Flash as the main
video format on the web. Although free Flash alternatives such as Gnash hav=
e
been in development for several years, they are still not ready for the
ordinary user's desktop, and Flash itself remains a non-free format.
However, now, the development of WebM
and HTML
5's video element mean that fre=
e
alternatives to Flash may soon become widespread. This possibility gained
momentum in 2010, although some browsers and applications do not yet suppor=
t
the new alternatives.
Legal Landmarks and Licensing
Arguments in the SCO legal cases continue to wind through the American
courts, and some details still need to be worked out. However, for most
observers, the beginning of the end came on March 30, 2010, when the United
States Supreme Court handed down the ruling that Novell, not SCO, was the
owner of the contested UNIX and UnixWare copyrights.
The awarding of
coststo
Novell on December 10 provides further indications that the saga that
has
fascinated the community for so long might actually have an ending some day=
.
Another court case watched by FOSS advocates that concluded in 2010 was Re:
Bilski , which was ruled upon on
June 28. FOSS advocates had hoped to use the case as a means of eliminating
software patents altogether, viewing them as stiflers of innovation and a
method for attacking free software. The decision stopped short of
eliminating software patents altogether in the United States, but placed
some restrictions on them that could make them saner in the future.
While these cases were winding down, the seeds of future concerns were also
sown. In 2010, the Free Software Foundation, which has long opposed Digital
Rights Management through its Defective By
DesignCampaign, turned its
attention to Apple's
iPhonene-dont-mix>and
App
Store , and Amazon's Android App
Store.
Besides the issues themselves, these issues make 2010 the year in which
Microsoft lost its position as the major opponent of software freedom to
other companies. However, since Microsoft has recently entered the mobile
device market, this is most likely only a temporary change.
Community Concerns
By far the most widely discussed community story in 2010 was the forking of
LibreOffice from OpenOffice.org. The fork has been waiting to happen for a
long time, due to widespread disillusion with Sun Microsystem's centralized
control of OpenOffice.org. However, the timing of the fork makes it a vote
of no confidence in Oracle's ability to run the project for the benefit of
the community. In place of Oracle, LibreOffice has created The Document
Foundation .
Since the fork is only a few months old, its effect is still unknown. So
far, LibreOffice's mailing lists and code contributions seem far more activ=
e
than OpenOffice.org's have been for several years. Nearly everything is
being re-thought, down to the names of the applications in the office suite=
.
However, whether The Document Foundation has the resources to implement all
these changes has yet to be tested. Working against it is the fact that
OpenOffice.org has considerable recognition value. To what extent
OpenOffice.org and LibreOffice will borrow code from each other is also
uncertain. Possibly, the two code bases will diverge rapidly -- which would
be wasteful, although possibly unavoidable.
Less publicized, but potentially as far-reaching in its consequences is the
project begun in 2010 to draft an anti-harassment
policy>suitable
for technology conferences. Such policies have already been
adopted by
a number of FOSS conferences, including LibrePlanet, Linux.conf.au and all
of Linux Foundation=E2=80=99s events. Given the ongoing concerns about
sexismn-Source-Softwares-Dirty-Little-Secret.htm>in
FOSS, this development could help to mitigate at least some of the
symptoms of this often unacknowledged problem.
When the Letter Replaces the Spirit
However, for me, the biggest story in 2010 is one that has gone largely
unrecognized: The increasing number of ways that companies have found to
keep to the letter of FOSS licensing while ignoring the spirit.
Nothing is new, of course, in companies exploiting FOSS for their own
benefit. In the past, however, most companies, however, have eventually
realized that at least limited cooperation with a community that includes
their rivals can benefit them. What is different now is the number of ways
in which companies are technically conforming to the requirements of FOSS
while finding ways to continue business as usual.
This trend takes numerous forms. At Oracle, it takes the form of maintainin=
g
projects, but limiting releases and development, and of bringing a
claimof
infringement on Java patents against Google.
--=20
Regards,
Evan M. Inker
--0015174c1c828c0e110497ef2147
Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
2010: The =
Year in Free and Open Source Software
By gement.earthweb.com/osrc/article.php/3918011">Bruce Byfield
December 21, 2010
le.php/3918011">http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/osrc/article.php/3918011a>
To all appearances, 2010 was a year of business as usual in free and=20
open source software (FOSS). It was neither the long-awaited and derided
Year of the Linux Desktop, nor a year marked by any great reversals.=20
However, some of the trends that emerged in 2010 may become more=20
important over the next few years -- particularly the emerging tendency=20
of corporations to comply technically with FOSS licenses while ignoring=20
their intent.
But in the short term, 2010 was marked by such a lack of drama that=20
deciding whether FOSS advanced or retreated in 2010 is next to=20
impossible. For better or worse, here are some of the leading FOSS=20
events and trends in 2010 for business, technology, legal matters, and=20
the community:
Business Moves and Directions
For those watching FOSS business, 2010 proved a mixed year. On the one=20
hand, Red Hat continued to thrive, to the extent that Forbes blogger Dan
Wood -billion/?boxes=3DHomepagechannels">predicts that the company will reac=
h $1 billion in revenues next year.
On the other hand, other companies with FOSS interests showed signs of=20
struggling in 2010. Smaller companies such as Xandros, which have made=20
headlines in previous years, were quieter in 2010, and, if they enjoyed=20
any successes, they were quiet ones that went mostly unnoticed.
As for the major players, Canonical, the commercial arm of the dominant=20
Ubuntu distribution, continued to search for profitability in a=20
distribution by adding cloud and music services, and laying the=20
groundwork for expansion into touch-screens. However, any success in=20
these efforts is going to take longer than a year to emerge.
Even worse, Novell, one of the major contributors to the Linux kernel and o=
ther FOSS projects, was agrees-to-be-acquired-by-attachmate-corporation/">sold to Attachmate, w=
ith some of its patents going to a news/item/Apple-EMC-Oracle-and-Microsoft-buy-Novell-patents-1155803.html">c=
onsortium
whose members include Apple, EMC, Microsoft, and Oracle. Although=20
FOSS-related patents do not appear to have been involved, nobody knows=20
yet whether Novell's FOSS contributions will continue under Attachmate=
=20
or not.
Similarly, 2010 also saw the finalization of Oracle's acquisition of Su=
n
Microsystem, which includes major FOSS projects such as Java, MySQL,=20
and OpenOffice.org.=20
Peter Brown, the executive director of the Free Software Foundation,=20
suggested to me that Oracle has still to develop a coherent free=20
software policy, but the decisions made by individual corporate units=20
have caused shockwaves throughout FOSS in the last year -- everything=20
from a /The-Fight-to-Save-MySQL-Interview-with-Monty-Widenius.htm">campaign
to prevent Oracle's acquisition of MySQL by Monty Widenius to the=20
forking of LibreOffice from OpenOffice.org (see below). Such reactions=20
leave little doubt that the community lacks confidence in Oracle as a=20
steward for its FOSS acquisitions.
Technology Trends
One piece of FOSS technology -- Google's Android mobile operating syste=
m
-- thrived in 2010. Throughout the year, the sale of Android devices=20
continued to soar, with headlines telling us that sales were=20
outstripping manufacturing capability and that they were outselling the=20
iPhone. This success was mitigated by complaints about lack of openness=20
in development, and the use of Digital Rights Management technologies=20
and proprietary Java. All these things make Android a platform built on=20
FOSS that has strayed badly from its ideals.
Another Google project, the Chrome browser, enjoyed something of the=20
same success in 2010, rising to an 8% market share by November, and=20
developing a supporting set of extensions at the same time. This growth=20
makes Chrome the major competitor for Mozilla's Firefox, so that it is=
=20
now currently setting the agenda for browser development. Chrome is an=20
essential element of the soon to be released Chrome OS, whose design=20
choices raise 3917011/Chrome-OS-Please-Dont-Open-the-Hood.htm">issues of privacy and =
control, but is also available separately.
A lesser known, but equally important development in FOSS technology during=
2010 is the development of the ibre/linux-libre/index">Linux-libre
kernel. Unlike the standard Libre kernel released by the kernel project
and most distributions, the Linux-libre kernel does not include=20
proprietary firmware blobs for device drivers, making it the most=20
philosophically free version of the kernel available. The Linux-libre=20
kernel has been adapted by a small but growing number of www.gnu.org/distros/free-distros.html">distributions, despite being sev=
eral releases behind the latest standard kernel.=20
Recently, the idea of a free kernel received a major endorsement when=20
Debian, the largest independent community-based distribution, tp://digitizor.com/2010/12/16/debian-6-0-squeeze-to-come-with-a-completely-=
free-linux-kernel/">announced
that its upcoming release would ship with a default free kernel. This=20
decision increases the likelihood of other major distributions providing
a free kernel as an option.
2010 also marked the start of a possible move away from Flash as the=20
main video format on the web. Although free Flash alternatives such as=20
Gnash have been in development for several years, they are still not=20
ready for the ordinary user's desktop, and Flash itself remains a=20
non-free format.=20
However, now, the development of bm">WebM and HTML=
5's video element
mean that free alternatives to Flash may soon become widespread. This=20
possibility gained momentum in 2010, although some browsers and=20
applications do not yet support the new alternatives.
Legal Landmarks and Licensing
Arguments in the SCO legal cases continue to wind through the American=20
courts, and some details still need to be worked out. However, for most=20
observers, the beginning of the end came on March 30, 2010, when the=20
United States Supreme Court handed down the ruling that Novell, not SCO,
was the owner of the contested UNIX and UnixWare copyrights.=20
The >awarding of costs
to Novell on December 10 provides further indications that the saga=20
that has fascinated the community for so long might actually have an=20
ending some day.
Another co=
urt case watched by FOSS advocates that concluded in 2010 was tp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_re_Bilski">Re: Bilski,
which was ruled upon on June 28. FOSS advocates had hoped to use the=20
case as a means of eliminating software patents altogether, viewing them
as stiflers of innovation and a method for attacking free software. The
decision stopped short of eliminating software patents altogether in=20
the United States, but placed some restrictions on them that could make=20
them saner in the future.
While thes=
e
cases were winding down, the seeds of future concerns were also sown.=20
In 2010, the Free Software Foundation, which has long opposed Digital=20
Rights Management through its >Defective By Design Campaign, turned its attention to Apple's ref=3D"http://www.fsf.org/blogs/community/why-free-software-and-apples-ipho=
ne-dont-mix">iPhone and A=
pp Store, and Amazon's Android ign.org/amazon-android-drm">App Store.=20
Besides th=
e
issues themselves, these issues make 2010 the year in which Microsoft=20
lost its position as the major opponent of software freedom to other=20
companies. However, since Microsoft has recently entered the mobile=20
device market, this is most likely only a temporary change.
Community =
Concerns
By far the=
=20
most widely discussed community story in 2010 was the forking of=20
LibreOffice from OpenOffice.org. The fork has been waiting to happen for
a long time, due to widespread disillusion with Sun Microsystem's=20
centralized control of OpenOffice.org. However, the timing of the fork=20
makes it a vote of no confidence in Oracle's ability to run the project=
=20
for the benefit of the community. In place of Oracle, LibreOffice has=20
created The Document Foundat=
ion.
Since the=
=20
fork is only a few months old, its effect is still unknown. So far,=20
LibreOffice's mailing lists and code contributions seem far more active=
=20
than OpenOffice.org's have been for several years. Nearly everything is=
=20
being re-thought, down to the names of the applications in the office=20
suite.
However,=
=20
whether The Document Foundation has the resources to implement all these
changes has yet to be tested. Working against it is the fact that=20
OpenOffice.org has considerable recognition value. To what extent=20
OpenOffice.org and LibreOffice will borrow code from each other is also=20
uncertain. Possibly, the two code bases will diverge rapidly -- which=20
would be wasteful, although possibly unavoidable.
Less publi=
cized, but potentially as far-reaching in its consequences is the project b=
egun in 2010 to draft an erence_anti-harassment_policy">anti-harassment policy suitable for tech=
nology conferences. Such policies have already been eminism.org/2010/12/16/friendly-conference-update/">adopted
by a number of FOSS conferences, including LibrePlanet, Linux.conf.au">Linux.conf.au=20
and all of Linux Foundation=E2=80=99s events. Given the ongoing concerns ab=
out
m-Open-Source-Softwares-Dirty-Little-Secret.htm">sexism in FOSS, this d=
evelopment could help to mitigate at least some of the symptoms of this oft=
en unacknowledged problem.
When the L=
etter Replaces the Spirit
However,=
=20
for me, the biggest story in 2010 is one that has gone largely=20
unrecognized: The increasing number of ways that companies have found to
keep to the letter of FOSS licensing while ignoring the spirit.
Nothing is=
=20
new, of course, in companies exploiting FOSS for their own benefit. In=20
the past, however, most companies, however, have eventually realized=20
that at least limited cooperation with a community that includes their=20
rivals can benefit them. What is different now is the number of ways in=20
which companies are technically conforming to the requirements of FOSS=20
while finding ways to continue business as usual.
This trend=
=20
takes numerous forms. At Oracle, it takes the form of maintaining=20
projects, but limiting releases and development, and of bringing a =3D"http://techcrunch.com/2010/08/13/android-oracle-java-lawsuit/">claim> of infringement on Java patents against Google.=20
--
Regards,
Evan M. Inker
--0015174c1c828c0e110497ef2147--
--0015174c1c828c0e110497ef2147
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
2010: The Year in Free and Open Source Software
By Bruce Byfieldagement.earthweb.com/osrc/article.php/3918011>
December 21, 2010
http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/osrc/article.php/3918011
To all appearances, 2010 was a year of business as usual in free and open
source software (FOSS). It was neither the long-awaited and derided Year of
the Linux Desktop, nor a year marked by any great reversals. However, some
of the trends that emerged in 2010 may become more important over the next
few years -- particularly the emerging tendency of corporations to comply
technically with FOSS licenses while ignoring their intent.
But in the short term, 2010 was marked by such a lack of drama that decidin=
g
whether FOSS advanced or retreated in 2010 is next to impossible. For bette=
r
or worse, here are some of the leading FOSS events and trends in 2010 for
business, technology, legal matters, and the community:
Business Moves and Directions
For those watching FOSS business, 2010 proved a mixed year. On the one hand=
,
Red Hat continued to thrive, to the extent that Forbes blogger Dan Wood
predicts/?boxes=3DHomepagechannels>that
the company will reach $1 billion in revenues next year.
On the other hand, other companies with FOSS interests showed signs of
struggling in 2010. Smaller companies such as Xandros, which have made
headlines in previous years, were quieter in 2010, and, if they enjoyed any
successes, they were quiet ones that went mostly unnoticed.
As for the major players, Canonical, the commercial arm of the dominant
Ubuntu distribution, continued to search for profitability in a distributio=
n
by adding cloud and music services, and laying the groundwork for expansion
into touch-screens. However, any success in these efforts is going to take
longer than a year to emerge.
Even worse, Novell, one of the major contributors to the Linux kernel and
other FOSS projects, was
soldhmate-corporation/>to
Attachmate, with some of its patents going to a
consortiumosoft-buy-Novell-patents-1155803.html>whose
members include Apple, EMC, Microsoft, and Oracle. Although
FOSS-related patents do not appear to have been involved, nobody knows yet
whether Novell's FOSS contributions will continue under Attachmate or not.
Similarly, 2010 also saw the finalization of Oracle's acquisition of Sun
Microsystem, which includes major FOSS projects such as Java, MySQL, and
OpenOffice.org.
Peter Brown, the executive director of the Free Software Foundation,
suggested to me that Oracle has still to develop a coherent free software
policy, but the decisions made by individual corporate units have caused
shockwaves throughout FOSS in the last year -- everything from a
campaignt-to-Save-MySQL-Interview-with-Monty-Widenius.htm>to
prevent Oracle's acquisition of MySQL by Monty Widenius to the forking
of
LibreOffice from OpenOffice.org (see below). Such reactions leave little
doubt that the community lacks confidence in Oracle as a steward for its
FOSS acquisitions.
Technology Trends
One piece of FOSS technology -- Google's Android mobile operating system --
thrived in 2010. Throughout the year, the sale of Android devices continued
to soar, with headlines telling us that sales were outstripping
manufacturing capability and that they were outselling the iPhone. This
success was mitigated by complaints about lack of openness in development,
and the use of Digital Rights Management technologies and proprietary Java.
All these things make Android a platform built on FOSS that has strayed
badly from its ideals.
Another Google project, the Chrome browser, enjoyed something of the same
success in 2010, rising to an 8% market share by November, and developing a
supporting set of extensions at the same time. This growth makes Chrome the
major competitor for Mozilla's Firefox, so that it is now currently setting
the agenda for browser development. Chrome is an essential element of the
soon to be released Chrome OS, whose design choices raise
issuesPlease-Dont-Open-the-Hood.htm>of
privacy and control, but is also available separately.
A lesser known, but equally important development in FOSS technology during
2010 is the development of the
Linux-librekernel.
Unlike the standard Libre kernel released by the kernel project and
most distributions, the Linux-libre kernel does not include proprietary
firmware blobs for device drivers, making it the most philosophically free
version of the kernel available. The Linux-libre kernel has been adapted by
a small but growing number of
distributions,
despite being several releases behind the latest standard kernel.
Recently, the idea of a free kernel received a major endorsement when
Debian, the largest independent community-based distribution,
announced-completely-free-linux-kernel/>that
its upcoming release would ship with a default free kernel. This
decision increases the likelihood of other major distributions providing a
free kernel as an option.
2010 also marked the start of a possible move away from Flash as the main
video format on the web. Although free Flash alternatives such as Gnash hav=
e
been in development for several years, they are still not ready for the
ordinary user's desktop, and Flash itself remains a non-free format.
However, now, the development of WebM
and HTML
5's video element mean that fre=
e
alternatives to Flash may soon become widespread. This possibility gained
momentum in 2010, although some browsers and applications do not yet suppor=
t
the new alternatives.
Legal Landmarks and Licensing
Arguments in the SCO legal cases continue to wind through the American
courts, and some details still need to be worked out. However, for most
observers, the beginning of the end came on March 30, 2010, when the United
States Supreme Court handed down the ruling that Novell, not SCO, was the
owner of the contested UNIX and UnixWare copyrights.
The awarding of
coststo
Novell on December 10 provides further indications that the saga that
has
fascinated the community for so long might actually have an ending some day=
.
Another court case watched by FOSS advocates that concluded in 2010 was Re:
Bilski , which was ruled upon on
June 28. FOSS advocates had hoped to use the case as a means of eliminating
software patents altogether, viewing them as stiflers of innovation and a
method for attacking free software. The decision stopped short of
eliminating software patents altogether in the United States, but placed
some restrictions on them that could make them saner in the future.
While these cases were winding down, the seeds of future concerns were also
sown. In 2010, the Free Software Foundation, which has long opposed Digital
Rights Management through its Defective By
DesignCampaign, turned its
attention to Apple's
iPhonene-dont-mix>and
App
Store , and Amazon's Android App
Store.
Besides the issues themselves, these issues make 2010 the year in which
Microsoft lost its position as the major opponent of software freedom to
other companies. However, since Microsoft has recently entered the mobile
device market, this is most likely only a temporary change.
Community Concerns
By far the most widely discussed community story in 2010 was the forking of
LibreOffice from OpenOffice.org. The fork has been waiting to happen for a
long time, due to widespread disillusion with Sun Microsystem's centralized
control of OpenOffice.org. However, the timing of the fork makes it a vote
of no confidence in Oracle's ability to run the project for the benefit of
the community. In place of Oracle, LibreOffice has created The Document
Foundation .
Since the fork is only a few months old, its effect is still unknown. So
far, LibreOffice's mailing lists and code contributions seem far more activ=
e
than OpenOffice.org's have been for several years. Nearly everything is
being re-thought, down to the names of the applications in the office suite=
.
However, whether The Document Foundation has the resources to implement all
these changes has yet to be tested. Working against it is the fact that
OpenOffice.org has considerable recognition value. To what extent
OpenOffice.org and LibreOffice will borrow code from each other is also
uncertain. Possibly, the two code bases will diverge rapidly -- which would
be wasteful, although possibly unavoidable.
Less publicized, but potentially as far-reaching in its consequences is the
project begun in 2010 to draft an anti-harassment
policy>suitable
for technology conferences. Such policies have already been
adopted by
a number of FOSS conferences, including LibrePlanet, Linux.conf.au and all
of Linux Foundation=E2=80=99s events. Given the ongoing concerns about
sexismn-Source-Softwares-Dirty-Little-Secret.htm>in
FOSS, this development could help to mitigate at least some of the
symptoms of this often unacknowledged problem.
When the Letter Replaces the Spirit
However, for me, the biggest story in 2010 is one that has gone largely
unrecognized: The increasing number of ways that companies have found to
keep to the letter of FOSS licensing while ignoring the spirit.
Nothing is new, of course, in companies exploiting FOSS for their own
benefit. In the past, however, most companies, however, have eventually
realized that at least limited cooperation with a community that includes
their rivals can benefit them. What is different now is the number of ways
in which companies are technically conforming to the requirements of FOSS
while finding ways to continue business as usual.
This trend takes numerous forms. At Oracle, it takes the form of maintainin=
g
projects, but limiting releases and development, and of bringing a
claimof
infringement on Java patents against Google.
--=20
Regards,
Evan M. Inker
--0015174c1c828c0e110497ef2147
Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
2010: The =
Year in Free and Open Source Software
By gement.earthweb.com/osrc/article.php/3918011">Bruce Byfield
December 21, 2010
le.php/3918011">http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/osrc/article.php/3918011a>
To all appearances, 2010 was a year of business as usual in free and=20
open source software (FOSS). It was neither the long-awaited and derided
Year of the Linux Desktop, nor a year marked by any great reversals.=20
However, some of the trends that emerged in 2010 may become more=20
important over the next few years -- particularly the emerging tendency=20
of corporations to comply technically with FOSS licenses while ignoring=20
their intent.
But in the short term, 2010 was marked by such a lack of drama that=20
deciding whether FOSS advanced or retreated in 2010 is next to=20
impossible. For better or worse, here are some of the leading FOSS=20
events and trends in 2010 for business, technology, legal matters, and=20
the community:
Business Moves and Directions
For those watching FOSS business, 2010 proved a mixed year. On the one=20
hand, Red Hat continued to thrive, to the extent that Forbes blogger Dan
Wood -billion/?boxes=3DHomepagechannels">predicts that the company will reac=
h $1 billion in revenues next year.
On the other hand, other companies with FOSS interests showed signs of=20
struggling in 2010. Smaller companies such as Xandros, which have made=20
headlines in previous years, were quieter in 2010, and, if they enjoyed=20
any successes, they were quiet ones that went mostly unnoticed.
As for the major players, Canonical, the commercial arm of the dominant=20
Ubuntu distribution, continued to search for profitability in a=20
distribution by adding cloud and music services, and laying the=20
groundwork for expansion into touch-screens. However, any success in=20
these efforts is going to take longer than a year to emerge.
Even worse, Novell, one of the major contributors to the Linux kernel and o=
ther FOSS projects, was agrees-to-be-acquired-by-attachmate-corporation/">sold to Attachmate, w=
ith some of its patents going to a news/item/Apple-EMC-Oracle-and-Microsoft-buy-Novell-patents-1155803.html">c=
onsortium
whose members include Apple, EMC, Microsoft, and Oracle. Although=20
FOSS-related patents do not appear to have been involved, nobody knows=20
yet whether Novell's FOSS contributions will continue under Attachmate=
=20
or not.
Similarly, 2010 also saw the finalization of Oracle's acquisition of Su=
n
Microsystem, which includes major FOSS projects such as Java, MySQL,=20
and OpenOffice.org.=20
Peter Brown, the executive director of the Free Software Foundation,=20
suggested to me that Oracle has still to develop a coherent free=20
software policy, but the decisions made by individual corporate units=20
have caused shockwaves throughout FOSS in the last year -- everything=20
from a /The-Fight-to-Save-MySQL-Interview-with-Monty-Widenius.htm">campaign
to prevent Oracle's acquisition of MySQL by Monty Widenius to the=20
forking of LibreOffice from OpenOffice.org (see below). Such reactions=20
leave little doubt that the community lacks confidence in Oracle as a=20
steward for its FOSS acquisitions.
Technology Trends
One piece of FOSS technology -- Google's Android mobile operating syste=
m
-- thrived in 2010. Throughout the year, the sale of Android devices=20
continued to soar, with headlines telling us that sales were=20
outstripping manufacturing capability and that they were outselling the=20
iPhone. This success was mitigated by complaints about lack of openness=20
in development, and the use of Digital Rights Management technologies=20
and proprietary Java. All these things make Android a platform built on=20
FOSS that has strayed badly from its ideals.
Another Google project, the Chrome browser, enjoyed something of the=20
same success in 2010, rising to an 8% market share by November, and=20
developing a supporting set of extensions at the same time. This growth=20
makes Chrome the major competitor for Mozilla's Firefox, so that it is=
=20
now currently setting the agenda for browser development. Chrome is an=20
essential element of the soon to be released Chrome OS, whose design=20
choices raise 3917011/Chrome-OS-Please-Dont-Open-the-Hood.htm">issues of privacy and =
control, but is also available separately.
A lesser known, but equally important development in FOSS technology during=
2010 is the development of the ibre/linux-libre/index">Linux-libre
kernel. Unlike the standard Libre kernel released by the kernel project
and most distributions, the Linux-libre kernel does not include=20
proprietary firmware blobs for device drivers, making it the most=20
philosophically free version of the kernel available. The Linux-libre=20
kernel has been adapted by a small but growing number of www.gnu.org/distros/free-distros.html">distributions, despite being sev=
eral releases behind the latest standard kernel.=20
Recently, the idea of a free kernel received a major endorsement when=20
Debian, the largest independent community-based distribution, tp://digitizor.com/2010/12/16/debian-6-0-squeeze-to-come-with-a-completely-=
free-linux-kernel/">announced
that its upcoming release would ship with a default free kernel. This=20
decision increases the likelihood of other major distributions providing
a free kernel as an option.
2010 also marked the start of a possible move away from Flash as the=20
main video format on the web. Although free Flash alternatives such as=20
Gnash have been in development for several years, they are still not=20
ready for the ordinary user's desktop, and Flash itself remains a=20
non-free format.=20
However, now, the development of bm">WebM and HTML=
5's video element
mean that free alternatives to Flash may soon become widespread. This=20
possibility gained momentum in 2010, although some browsers and=20
applications do not yet support the new alternatives.
Legal Landmarks and Licensing
Arguments in the SCO legal cases continue to wind through the American=20
courts, and some details still need to be worked out. However, for most=20
observers, the beginning of the end came on March 30, 2010, when the=20
United States Supreme Court handed down the ruling that Novell, not SCO,
was the owner of the contested UNIX and UnixWare copyrights.=20
The >awarding of costs
to Novell on December 10 provides further indications that the saga=20
that has fascinated the community for so long might actually have an=20
ending some day.
Another co=
urt case watched by FOSS advocates that concluded in 2010 was tp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_re_Bilski">Re: Bilski,
which was ruled upon on June 28. FOSS advocates had hoped to use the=20
case as a means of eliminating software patents altogether, viewing them
as stiflers of innovation and a method for attacking free software. The
decision stopped short of eliminating software patents altogether in=20
the United States, but placed some restrictions on them that could make=20
them saner in the future.
While thes=
e
cases were winding down, the seeds of future concerns were also sown.=20
In 2010, the Free Software Foundation, which has long opposed Digital=20
Rights Management through its >Defective By Design Campaign, turned its attention to Apple's ref=3D"http://www.fsf.org/blogs/community/why-free-software-and-apples-ipho=
ne-dont-mix">iPhone and A=
pp Store, and Amazon's Android ign.org/amazon-android-drm">App Store.=20
Besides th=
e
issues themselves, these issues make 2010 the year in which Microsoft=20
lost its position as the major opponent of software freedom to other=20
companies. However, since Microsoft has recently entered the mobile=20
device market, this is most likely only a temporary change.
Community =
Concerns
By far the=
=20
most widely discussed community story in 2010 was the forking of=20
LibreOffice from OpenOffice.org. The fork has been waiting to happen for
a long time, due to widespread disillusion with Sun Microsystem's=20
centralized control of OpenOffice.org. However, the timing of the fork=20
makes it a vote of no confidence in Oracle's ability to run the project=
=20
for the benefit of the community. In place of Oracle, LibreOffice has=20
created The Document Foundat=
ion.
Since the=
=20
fork is only a few months old, its effect is still unknown. So far,=20
LibreOffice's mailing lists and code contributions seem far more active=
=20
than OpenOffice.org's have been for several years. Nearly everything is=
=20
being re-thought, down to the names of the applications in the office=20
suite.
However,=
=20
whether The Document Foundation has the resources to implement all these
changes has yet to be tested. Working against it is the fact that=20
OpenOffice.org has considerable recognition value. To what extent=20
OpenOffice.org and LibreOffice will borrow code from each other is also=20
uncertain. Possibly, the two code bases will diverge rapidly -- which=20
would be wasteful, although possibly unavoidable.
Less publi=
cized, but potentially as far-reaching in its consequences is the project b=
egun in 2010 to draft an erence_anti-harassment_policy">anti-harassment policy suitable for tech=
nology conferences. Such policies have already been eminism.org/2010/12/16/friendly-conference-update/">adopted
by a number of FOSS conferences, including LibrePlanet, Linux.conf.au">Linux.conf.au=20
and all of Linux Foundation=E2=80=99s events. Given the ongoing concerns ab=
out
m-Open-Source-Softwares-Dirty-Little-Secret.htm">sexism in FOSS, this d=
evelopment could help to mitigate at least some of the symptoms of this oft=
en unacknowledged problem.
When the L=
etter Replaces the Spirit
However,=
=20
for me, the biggest story in 2010 is one that has gone largely=20
unrecognized: The increasing number of ways that companies have found to
keep to the letter of FOSS licensing while ignoring the spirit.
Nothing is=
=20
new, of course, in companies exploiting FOSS for their own benefit. In=20
the past, however, most companies, however, have eventually realized=20
that at least limited cooperation with a community that includes their=20
rivals can benefit them. What is different now is the number of ways in=20
which companies are technically conforming to the requirements of FOSS=20
while finding ways to continue business as usual.
This trend=
=20
takes numerous forms. At Oracle, it takes the form of maintaining=20
projects, but limiting releases and development, and of bringing a =3D"http://techcrunch.com/2010/08/13/android-oracle-java-lawsuit/">claim> of infringement on Java patents against Google.=20
--
Regards,
Evan M. Inker
--0015174c1c828c0e110497ef2147--
|
|
