[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Linux-aus] Open source: time for a name change?

Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
On Wednesday, 6 August 2003 at 12:06:49 +0930, Dan Shearer wrote:

On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 11:45:53AM +0930, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:

Years ago, rms came out with a pretty obvious term, "free software".
Despite everything, the name was misinterpreted (beer?  actions?).
And the suits didn't like it because it smacked too much of
counterculture.  So the term "open source" was invented, and it's
doing quite well for itself.

But if you can misinterpret the intentions of "free software", how
much more can you misinterpret "open source"?  Go out in the street
and ask passers-by what each means.  Those who have never heard of
either will have a reasonable idea what free software is, but they
wouldn't even associate "open source" with software until they're
told.

To most people free software is IE (but you can download it for nothing!) and WinZip. Back to the old problem of what free means...


The only really solid term I've seen is "Linux". It seems to be readily
recognisable as a "free software thingy" and I've used Linux-style for
describing Apache on Solaris and FreeBSD to good effect. As long as
people understand the details hardly matter.


Same as my experience. At least they may have seen 'Linux' mentioned on the cover of a mag or in the business/ tech print media. Most (non developer) people who use only 'black box' software don't even realise there is source code. Once that hurdle is overcome (sort of) then try explaining what it means to have 'open source' rather than closed source. Then watch their eyes glaze over. There are usually too many mental barriers to jump in one go... But why give away the source when you can sell it? Doesn't that make it insecure? You only get what you pay for... Does it come from MS? So how does it get paid for? Who owns it? and so on.


If you want to understand the details, yes, the details matter.  Sure,
you can use "Linux" as a sort of catchall, but there will be groups
who don't want to be thought of as "Linux".  And it also fails the
man-in-the-street test, though possibly not as badly as "open source".

Greg
--
See complete headers for address and phone numbers

The man-in-the-street's mindset is too deeply entrenched in a closed 'black box' software culture to get the idea of open source/ free software without prolonged exposure to the ideas and software. Even then, you have to overcome the care factor. At some point the consumer stops caring about the details and trusts the vendor to do the right thing. Most consumers will only 'get it' and understand a catch word when they are using foss by default, not choice.

Tim Bowden