All the latest UK technology news, reviews and analysis
|
|
|
26 Aug 2009
The Free Software Foundation (FSF) is holding a rally in Boston, Massachusetts today to campaign against Microsoft and proprietary software, ahead of the release of Windows 7 on 22 October.
The FSF was founded in 1985 to promote the use of free software, particularly GNU operating software and its GNU/Linux variants, and the rights of users to modify and redistribute computer programs.
A Windows 7 Sins campaign outlines seven areas where the FSF claims that proprietary software can hurt users - invading privacy, poisoning education, locking users in, abusing standards, leveraging monopolistic behaviour, enforcing digital rights management, and threatening user security.
The points are outlined in a letter sent to the heads of every company in the Fortune 500, except Microsoft.
"Our growing dependence on computers and software requires our society to re-evaluate its obsession with proprietary software that spies on citizens' activities and limits their freedom to be in control of their computing," said FSF executive director Peter Brown.
"Our national and local governments, non-governmental organisations, universities and schools that use proprietary software are undertaking bad public policy, often through ignorance or misplaced values.
"There is free software available right now for any activity you or your business needs, and it is better in the most important aspect: it respects your freedom."
Matt Lee, manager of the new FSF campaign, hopes to make businesses and computer users more aware of what he perceives as the growing dangers of proprietary software from Microsoft and companies such as Apple and Adobe.
"With the release of Microsoft's updated operating system, business leaders have the opportunity to escape to freedom and join a growing list of leaders who understand that sinking money and time into proprietary software is a dead-end inconsistent with their best interests," he said.
Microsoft could not immediately provide comment.
Latest stories from Operating Systems
Related articles
Related jobs
Poll
What is the most important IT priority for your company this year?
Connect with V3.co.uk
This paper focuses on a series of best practices and techniques for development teams looking to improve their software development processes
Why good data management at all levels is essential in the modern business (video, 6mins)
VB.Net Developer - Winforms / ASP.Net / VB6 - Wolverhampton...
Java Developer, Online betting/Gaming, e-commerce, London...
C# Developer - Winforms / SQL - Cannock - My client is...
Middleware Consultant - Java / J2EE/ JBoss / Weblogic...
Keep up to date with the latest products, services and technologies from the world's leading IT companies. IThound.com brings you over 2,000 white papers, case studies and analyst reports.
Do you agree?
What most Free Software advocates fail to realize...
...is that most business people and leaders of NGOs and non-profits do not worship at the altar of ANY software maker. They (incorrectly) assume that anyone not worshiping GNU/Linux must worship the other. I can attest that most business leaders and leaders of non-profits are operating at a level way above this petty idolatry and that they only want the best tool for the job at a reasonable price. They are not selling their freedom to MSFT, so please relax.
Posted by: FriedCow 13 Oct 2009
Please listen
What the hell?? It amazes me how so many people can read and not understanding. Microsoft control 90% of the market. This makes it almost impossible for people to choose anything else whether you have the money or not. Linux is very capable in all aspects of computing but because Microsoft don't allow Linux compatability with their 90% market share, for the moment it is seen as inferior to the uninformed end user. Microsoft are very cleaver in this respect. Every now and again they will launch a free anti non-Microsoft marketing campaign to keep themselves in the driving seat. Why else would you sit on 265 supposed patent infringements and not prosecute!? Weather you like Microsoft products or not, you have too admit they ARE the very reflection of industry monopoly and thats just not a good thing. The FSF make some very childish noises sometimes but their points are still valid. We should not be allowing one company to dictate our future global computing path! If they had an equal adversary, things would be much better for the end user right now!
Posted by: systemsavvi 08 Sep 2009
Mad Scientists abound!
I remember the good old daze. You look hard for freeware and read up or download to try and half the time they were written by some crackpot humanitarian guy from Ukraine or some place who either can't be bother to give an FAQ much less offer a forum or won't answer you if you don't write the question in some unknown format of theirs...to this day, I hardly know how to use most of them. I haven't even seen Windows 7 yet! Might they keep their spam levels muted for a while? I use Word Perfect as I've never liked Word and even Publisher is better than Word. I don't think Linux or whatever is something I care to use. Having been a computer user for 30 years (TRS-80 Model I) and also having used an HP-3000 minimainframe in college well before Windows I can also say that Win 3.11 was a blessing and that the eventual near freedom from a DOS-based existence a godsend. I used a Linux based network setup in a local internet cafe a few times early in the decade and found I could bear it but NOT setting up the thing on my computer not getting things to work. MS-DOS shell routines were a lot easier than Linux and when I got to my first WINDOWS version of WordPerfect I was overjoyed. If a child of 13 who loved Gary Numan and all the insane futuristic things he seemed to indicate cannot fathom these concepts, where did our CHILDREN get the disease?
Posted by: T. Hex 04 Sep 2009
No such thing as free
Software might be free to download or use, but if you are running a business, you will need support. You can try to self support but that costs money for hiring or training. Good luck with that! Or you can pay for the supplier to support you at a cost. That's how Ubuntu, Red Hat etc make their money. Obviously Microsoft charge for support as well, but if you looked at the TCO comparing all aspects of "free" software with "proprietary" software, you might be surprised.
Posted by: Darryl 02 Sep 2009
If MS OS could admired by Users ?
Hei FSF members! You have very big numbers of Bright Developers around the world, then also if u could not admired by PEOPLE / IT Organisations, thats only ur FAULTS not of MS.Why cant u combine all Distros and make a Better OS than MS WINDOWS and admired by anyone in the world ? CANT U ? then shutup or do ur work! b cos u cannot make unity among diff distros and make new Product(commercial or non ).
Posted by: raj M Takur 01 Sep 2009
Free Software: 80% scrap
I run my own small business and would be a candidate for free software. So it tried several freely available CRM packages, spent a lot of time to get them running and found myself lost in space. Finally I took MS-CRM, a book and a few days and it worked. At least for me. Overall, free software is not a working business model, nevertheless non-free software is often much too expensive. But: money makes (most of the time) thing happen more easily.
Posted by: old_boy 31 Aug 2009
They don't Criticize Mac's because...
The 6% of the OS market who use Macs wouldn't listen to anything these guys have to say anyway. I'm not surprised they went after MS. It's the big target and affects more of the installed user base. Even so, who cares what they think?
Posted by: Alan Katerinsky 28 Aug 2009
Why I stick with Windows
As the owner-manager of a small business, and as one who does most of his own IT development and support, I should be the ideal candidate for using non-proprietary software. The reason I don't is simple. Microsoft Access.
Posted by: Andrew Marshall 27 Aug 2009
Human nature...inbuilt choice?
The great human logic engine, the brain, does have the 50:50 choice...pay for a proprietary OS or download a free one like Linux. If people choose to pay for a MS OS or Mac OS that is their choice, there are free alternatives. Why should MS change their business model and start offering Windows for free? Don't like the price point? Go use Linux or the like. I think they've made a pretty good go at Redmond to offer Windows 7 at a decent price during the pre-order period and its a damn good OS from the testing I've done on the BETA, RC and RTM. Much quicker, better looking and more secure than Vista was at launch. I don't mind paying for it.
Posted by: Navdeep 27 Aug 2009
Yes, true but..
Much as I support the ideals of FSF, for a lot of companies proprietory software is the only option. Not every application has a FSF equivalent or a linux version. It's not an invasion of freedom, it's what's needed to allow people to do their job or to give their company a commercial edge. Sometimes a windows app is the only one available and that means XP/Vista/7. I'm not an MS employee, I just work in the world of corporate apps where various vendors' s/w has to co-exist on the same PC and work.
Posted by: Old IT Guy 27 Aug 2009
Get Your Facts Straight
The FSF is not telling anyone they should choose OSS. What they are suggesting is that organisations like schools & other public institutions shouldn't be beholden to a proprietary organisation & they are correct. These orgs should be using something that isn't a single entity. That is a private business or user's choice. Public companies should be separate & reliant on no single organisation in the way that Oz companies are in Australia. OSS is the way these organisations should be headed & proprietary software should only be available as a side option for specialised requirements. The cost of using proprietary software in Australia is in the order of 2 billion or more dollars that is just handed to an American software company whether this be Microsoft, Sun Microsystems, IBM or Apple. Much of this money is wasted because there are perfectly usable solutions in most cases that is free. Also, the graphical user interface of OSS is often as good as the proprietary version & can be used immediately with no re-training.
Posted by: Rex Alfie Lee 27 Aug 2009
Free Software Foundation trashes Windows 7
For an organisation supposedly arguing freedom what gives them the right to tell me what to use or anyone else. I haven't heard them bleeting about the new Mac OS which is just as proprietary if not more so.
Posted by: Joe 26 Aug 2009