ZeroPaid.com » free

Discover Great Apps With Appsfire

Jon Kaykin — Tue, 31 Jan 2012 00:43:53 +0000

Appsfire provides many tools for you to discover and share the greatest apps out there. With 500,000 apps in the app store and 300,000 in the Android Market , it can get kind of crowded. Everyday new apps are released but it's impossible for anyone to keep up. So how do you discover and share the best apps? Say hello to Appsfire, a community driven app discovery network. Appsfire provides tools and streams for users to be able to discover those gems. On their website they feature VIP's; these are people, as they call them, who are "the most influential and expert iPhone users around." Another feature on the site is something they call AppMixes, which is basically aggregated combinations of apps that have a common topic or functionality, for example: 11 Vital Mobile Apps for Entrepreneurs (source). Out of all the features, my favorite is AppTrends. This tool allows users to see the most trending apps according to Facebook (measured by the likes, comments and shares) or Twitter (measured by the amount of tweets). Using social media to discover app trends is brilliant. These aforementioned features are great for app discovery but in order to get the most out of what Appsfire has to offer, I recommend downloading the app. Here are the ways you can discover and share the best apps with Appsfire: FRIENDS Want to know what your friends use on their iPhone? Super easy with Appsfire: find out what your friends are using or loving or even removing. DEALS Save Money! Be the first to know when great apps go on sale, or even go free. LOCAL Check out the apps that are useful in your city or country. If you’re traveling, discover apps to help you navigate your surroundings. VIP’S Come and check the app that tech celebrities, bloggers and other app experts recommend HOT APPS Discover the apps that are being talked about on Twitter & Facebook, or soaring through the App Store rankings. APP MIXES We’re constantly scanning the web to find the best apps by topics created by the best publications. Looking for the best apps for photography, music, or cooking app? We’ve got that. SEARCH We enhance the search experience by including app mixes, so you can browse through apps which real people have identified as being high-quality. APPS FOR YOU Appsfire delivers you recommendations based on your personal tastes by analyzing the apps you have on your iPhone.* As you can see, Appsfire has figured out a great way to help users discover the best apps. With a nice design, clean functionality and a price tag of FREE, I recommend downloading it for iPhone/ iPad or Android. What are your opinions on Appsfire? Jon@zeropaid.com | @jkaykin

Movie Director Releases ‘A Lonely Place for Dying’ to BitTorrent Legally

Drew Wilson — Sat, 02 Jul 2011 22:15:20 +0000

Justin Eugene Evans, the writer and director of 'A Lonely Place for Dying' released the first part of the movie to BitTorrent via the VODO services recently. He joins the ranks of many other producers who have chosen to freely distribute their content online for free via the ever present file-sharing medium.

“We’ve received a dozen offers to release the film through traditional methods,” said Justin Eugene Evans, writer/director of A Lonely Place for Dying. “However, none of the offers made sense to us financially or artistically. Every producer’s rep, sales agent and independent distributor presented us with a draconian contract. Between BitTorrent’s technology and VODO’s ability to deliver an audience we decided this was the superior path. This gives our motion picture global reach. And, VODO’s donation model is at the tipping point; with their help we’ll earn our investors just as much as we’d have received from a Los Angeles sales agent. While these experiments still raise inevitable questions about business models, one thing is sure. The platform is ready and BitTorrent has proven their intention to help.” And that is how he came about such a decision. Now, the movie is available on VODO for free download. Users can pass along money via the donation feature on the page. “BitTorrent is dedicated to helping filmmakers overcome the hurdles of global content distribution. The key ingredients? The elimination of expensive infrastructure and direct access to a massive audience,” said Shahi Ghanem, chief strategist at BitTorrent. “High-quality productions like A Lonely Place for Dying are proving that BitTorrent’s 100,000,000 million user community is a viable option for building a fan base. This film is a technically masterful motion picture that puts story and character front and center. We encourage our users to download the film and support the filmmakers. A Lonely Place for Dying will keep you on the edge of your seats.” Now, by far, this isn't the first movie to be freely distributed online. In fact, the earliest movie I have personally seen that was freely distributed was a movie called Elephants Dream which certainly shared a good degree of success. It's great to know more movie directors are heading down a similar path. One can easily see the success of "A Lonely Place for Dying" on the VODO page with nearly 50,000 downloads as of this writing - a number that only stands to grow. One thing that many content producers wonder is if such a method of distribution really pays off. There's some who hold to the myth that if something is freely available on the internet, then no one would pay for it. There have been known successes even with pay-what-you-want deals like the Wolfire's ever famous Humble Indie Bundle which earned $1.8 million, then subsequently surpassed that and raked in over half a million on the third round. Then who could forget the RadioHead's "In Rainbows" pay-what-you-want success? There's plenty of success stories which involved freely distributing content on virtually every major kind of entertainment. I don't think any kind of hoping that freely distributing content online for free won't work would change the fact that it's a tried and tested method that has already garnered a sizable share of success stories. At this stage, it's only a matter of time before more and more people are willing to experiment with such an idea. For all we know, this type of content distribution will one day be the rule and not the exception and we can look back to today and think, "Wow, what were some of these people thinking going around and suing people all the time for downloading?" In the mean time we are certainly seeing some of the brave souls giving this method a chance and as time goes on, that list of people who choose to freely distribute content for free is only going to keep growing whether big producers or small producers. I, for one, salute those who at least try free distribution. Further reading: IMDB entry for "A Lonely Place for Dying" Have a tip? Want to contact the author? You can do so by sending a PM via the forums or via e-mail at drew@zeropaid.com.

French Record Labels Identifying 25,000 Pirates p/ Day

Jared Moya — Mon, 25 Oct 2010 23:40:02 +0000

French labels trade body director general David El Sayegh says the music industry has been been identifying and submitting the IP addresses to the govt of more than 25,000 suspected file-sharers per day.

It appears that France's “Creation and Internet” law is in full swing with news that record labels in that country have been identifying more than 25,000 illegal file-sharers per day. Now the figure is not the exact amount of how many have been subsequently warned by the govt to discontinue their illegal activities, but it does point to a disturbing trend of what's possible. First proposed back in June of 2008, the "Creation an Internet" law was formally passed last September, but not after first before being ruled unconstitutional over the fact that an agency (HADOPI), and not a judge, was allowed to disconnect people from the Internet. The first email warnings were sent out earlier this by the ISPs Bouygues and Numericable. Free at first refused to send them on the govt's behalf due to the fact that Article L331-25 of the Code of Intellectual Property says that warning letters shall be submitted “through” ISPs and not "by" ISPs. It eventually relented after the Minister of Culture, Frederic Mitterand issued a decree amending the Code of Intellectual Property so that it clearly states ISPs are “required to submit” warning letters to subscribers on the govt’s behalf. Free has vowed to appeal the legality of that decree. In the meantime, according to French labels trade body director general David El Sayegh, record labels have been identifying and submitting the IP addresses of more than 25,000 suspected file-sharers per day. "It is too early" to know if the law is helping to boost digital music sales, says El Sayegh, but I think it's unlikely to dramatically boost sales, if it all. File-sharers will simply switch to so-called cyberlockers like Mega Upload, RapidShare, etc., to other P2P services like Usenet and BitTorrent, or mask their traffic altogether from the comfort of an encrypted VPN connection. Stay tuned. jared@zeropaid.com

French ISP Vows to Appeal “Three-Strikes” Emails

Jared Moya — Tue, 19 Oct 2010 18:52:23 +0000

Free founder Xavier Niel says "we will challenge this new decree" requiring that it send warning letters to customers accused of illegal file-sharing on behalf of the govt.

The French ISP Free continues to disagree with the govt's requirement that it send "three-strikes" warning letters to its customers as part of the “Creation and Internet” law, the controversial “three-strikes” measure to fight P2P that was formally passed last September. It cites Article L331-25 of the Code of Intellectual Property which says that warning letters shall be submitted by the Commission for the Protection of Rights “under its seal and on its behalf, electronically and “through” ISPs. Free says the inclusion of the word “through” meant exactly that, and that if anything the govt needs to setup a secure SMTP server within the ISP to contact its customers on their own. After initially refusing to comply, it eventually relented after the Minister of Culture, Frederic Mitterand, lived up to his promise to issue a decree amending the Code of Intellectual Property so that it clearly states that ISPs are indeed "required to submit" warning letters to subscribers on the govt's behalf. The penalty for noncompliance is 1,500 euros ($2094 USD) per IP address. Free had reportedly been preparing to challenge the decree on the grounds that the regulatory authority for electronic communications and postal services was not consulted as required by law, but that plan was apparently put on hold – at least until now. Although Free began sending out "three-strikes" warning letters yesterday, it has announced that it plans to challenge the decree before the country's State Council. "We will challenge this new decree, which seems illegal," says Xavier Niel, who created Free back in 1999. "Unlike other ISPs, we will apply the law strictly, but only the law. Our position was neither marketing or financial." His comments about "unlike other ISPs" are likely a swipe at ISPs like Bouygues and Numericable which have seemed all to eager to comply with govt demands, even if they aren't spelled out in law. Perhaps the name "Free" is more apt than we think. Though agreeing that "creators must be compensated for their work," Niel also takes a swipe at the “Creation and Internet” law itself, arguing that it's a "bad law that does not solve anything, which is easily circumvented and does not take into account the evolution of the form taken by piracy." This was exemplified earlier this year when it was reported that in the face of the new law piracy had become a "favorite sport" among French youth. Niel predicts it will take several months before the decree is nullified. Too bad we can't say the same for the “Creation and Internet” law. Stay tuned. jared@zeropaid.com

French ISP Relents, Will Send “Three-Strikes” After All

Jared Moya — Thu, 14 Oct 2010 16:59:16 +0000

Free bows to govt decree, and will begin sending out “three-strikes” email warnings to its customers on the govt's behalf sometime later today.

Last week I first mentioned how the French ISP Free was refusing to submit electronic “three-strikes” warning letters to its customers on the govt’s behalf as part of the “Creation and Internet” law, the controversial “three-strikes” measure to fight P2P that was formally passed last September. It cited Article L331-25 of the Code of Intellectual Property which says that warning letters shall be submitted by the Commission for the Protection of Rights “under its seal and on its behalf, electronically and “through” ISPs. Free argued that the inclusion of the word “through” meant exactly that, and that if anything the govt needs to setup a secure SMTP server within the ISP to contact its customers on their own. Minister of Culture Frederic Mitterand “condemned” Free and vowed to issue a decree clarifying the requirement, a promise he lived up to recently, stunning many who thought the process would take at least several weeks and require formal tweaking of the “Creation and Internet Law.” Free reportedly prepared to challenge the decree on the grounds that the regulatory authority for electronic communications and postal services was not consulted as required by law, but that plan has apparently been put on hold - at least for now. It surely believes the original language of the law and the subsequent decree don't require it to send email warnings, but likely calculated that the financial risk of noncompliance is too great at 1,500 euros ($2094 USD) per IP address. It didn't help matters any that French President Nicolas Sarkozy wanted to make an example of a "rebellious" ISP. According to Electron Libre:

A velocity that surprised to old regulars of the Rue de Valois, but it must be said, explaining that, as the gun went very high. Nicolas Sarkozy himself has pressed the button! The letter was then passed by the Culture Council of the Elysee, which has not blocked, before landing in front of Frédéric Mitterrand. The order was clear: we must make an example of the rebellious ...

With Pres Sarkozy gunning for your defeat its now wonder they chose to toe the "three-strikes" line, especially after he's repeatedly vowed to do everything in his power to "protect" copyright holders, even calling increased Internet regulation a "moral imperative” necessary to "correct the excesses and abuses that arise from the total absence of rules." With that kind of hyperbole and rhetoric it's no wonder they decided to back down. Free still has two months to challenge the decree, but fighting the inevitable seems a losing proposition in my opinion. Stay tuned. jared@zeropaid.com

French Govt to Fine ISP for Refusal to Send “Three-Strikes” Emails

Jared Moya — Wed, 13 Oct 2010 08:03:25 +0000

Minister of Culture Frederic Mitterand has made good on his promise for a speedy amendment to France's Article L331-25 of the Code of Intellectual Property, the modification now requiring the French ISP Free to submit email "three-strikes" warnings on the govt's behalf or risk fines of 1,500 euros ($2094 USD), a process that was expected to several weeks rather than days.

Last week I mentioned how the French ISP Free was refusing to submit electronic "three-strikes" warning letters to its customers on the govt's behalf as part of the “Creation and Internet” law, the controversial “three-strikes” measure to fight P2P that was formally passed last September. It cited Article L331-25 of the Code of Intellectual Property which says that warning letters shall be submitted by the Commission for the Protection of Rights "under its seal and on its behalf, electronically and "through" ISPs. Free argued that the inclusion of the word "through" meant exactly that, and that if anything the govt need to setup a secure SMTP server within the ISP to contact its customers on their own. Minister of Culture Frederic Mitterand "condemned" Free and called it a "formal breach of its statutory duties." He vowed to issue a decree clarifying the requirement, a promise he lived up to recently, stunning many who thought the process would take at least several weeks and require formal tweaking of the "Creation and Internet Law." The decree reads:

Decree No. 2010-1202 of 12 October 2010 amending Article R. 331-37 of the Code of Intellectual Property Section A. 331-37 of the Code of intellectual property is amended to read:: "Operators are required to submit electronically to the subscriber each of the recommendations referred to the first and the second paragraph of Article L. 331-25, within twenty-four hours after its submission by the Commission for the Protection of Rights. » "

The penalty for failure to comply is still the same - 1,500 euros ($2094 USD). It's still uncertain if the decree is legal, however, being that it still doesn't change the law that requires the govt to send warning letters "under its seal and on its behalf, electronically" and "through" ISPs. European Union law also requires that member countries notify it of any new laws punishing ISPs for noncompliance. Free seems to be convinced it's in the right, journalist Emmanuel Torregano, tweeting that "Free is preparing to tackle the Council of State this afternoon, more to come.." It will likely argue that the regulatory authority for electronic communications and postal services was not consulted as required by law. Either way, though Free seems to be battling over semantics - the "three-strikes" beast" reaming intact all the while - I must admit it's nice that at least one ISP is forcing the govt to abide by the law as written and be the one to warn people on its own. Stay tuned. jared@zeropaid.com

French ISP “Refusing” to Comply With “Three-Strikes?

Jared Moya — Thu, 07 Oct 2010 18:44:04 +0000

ISP Free refuses to send emails to customers warning them of suspected infringement, pointing out the law only requires it to turn over their identities to the authorities which, in turn, is the one responsible for contacting them.

Several days ago I mentioned how French ISPs Bouygues and Numericable earned the distinction of having been the first ISPs to send subscribers a letter warning them of suspected copyright infringing activity with Orange and SFR following soon thereafter. Well, not all ISPs have been so willing to comply. The effort is part of the country’s “Creation and Internet” law, the controversial “three-strikes” measure to fight P2P in that country that was first proposed back in June of 2008. It was formally passed last September, but not after first before being ruled unconstitutional over the fact that an agency (HADOPI), and not a judge, was allowed to disconnect people from the Internet. Free is apparently refusing to send emails to its customers warning them of suspected infringement, pointing out the law only requires it to turn over their identities to authorities which, in turn is the one responsible for contacting them. "We do not send Hadopi emails," it says. "Obviously all the other operators have agreed to send the 1st email," it adds. "They decided to collaborate, we limit ourselves just to respect the law." The law only provides a penalty of 1,500 euros per IP address an ISP refuses to identify, but spells out no punishment for those that refuse to send out email warnings to suspected file-sharers. Article L331-25 of the Code of Intellectual Property reads:

When hearing of facts that could constitute a breach of the obligation under Article L. 336-3, the Commission for protection of rights can be sent to the subscriber, under its seal and on his behalf, electronically and through the person whose business is to provide access to services public communication line has a contract with the subscriber.

In other words it's the Hadopi's job to inform people "under its seal and on its behalf." Hadopi counters that "there is an obligation for every ISP to send emails" and that Free is obligated to comply. Minister of Culture Frederic Mitterand is also unhappy with Free's stance. "The turnaround of Free, which on Monday decided not to proceed at this stage, to its customers warning messages in formal breach of its statutory duties, is unacceptable," the ministry said in a statement. "This, the minister strongly condemned, must end as soon as possible." It also warned of punishment for refusal to comply. "Laws" Creation and Internet ", which established the framework necessary to long-term development of a legal abundant and quality, will be applied," it adds. "A provider who fails to comply with its legal obligations should therefore bear the legal and financial consequences. A decree will specify shortly the sanctions in this context. " In any event, it would require at least a few weeks for the govt to review and amend the law to require ISPs to send emails on the govt's behalf. In the meantime it looks as though file-sharing Free customers will remain email warning letter "free." Stay tuned. jared@zeropaid.com

Open Licensed Music Movement Gathers Momentum In Germany

Drew Wilson — Thu, 26 Aug 2010 03:38:07 +0000

Open licensed music isn't entirely new. Artists seeing the pitfalls of copyright isn't entirely new either. But what is interesting is to see a German music outlet distribute over 345,000 free songs in one month.

In some music circles, there is the well-founded argument that good music is actually a dime a dozen, the only thing that makes a difference is what is actively promoted thanks to the major record labels stranglehold on the various traditional channels to promote their music. Whether or not this is still holding true in Germany is unclear. What is clear is some impressive numbers coming out of one music service. What is clear is that the free music movement (free as in open license music such as Creative Commons) has been quietly rolling along online for the last several years, gradually gathering steam wherever possible. One sign that the open license movement is gathering steam was when ASCAP attacked Creative Commons not once, but twice. It certainly says a lot when a movement gets this kind of attention from such a well-known organization - even if the attacks against it seem to be ill-conceived. Over in Germany, there is a new sign that open licensed music such as Creative Commons licensed music is gathering momentum. According to German site, Darker Radio, the free music charts for August 2010 topped 345,000 downloads (Google translated). A vast majority of the songs appear to be available on Archive.org and Jamendo - both sites that distribute Creative Commons music. Jamendo is a service that allows users to download music for free under a Creative Commons license through file-sharing networks such as eDonkey2000 and BitTorrent. If the user likes it, they can pay for the music after to help support the artist. Questioning the values of copyright, not to mention the real purpose of copyright, has been a topic discussed in Germany for years. One artist, Der Plan, created a music video that sings how ideas are free and copyright is slavery while blowing up various icons of intellectual property protection back in 2004. The video has been somewhat iconic to the questioning of copyright since its release in Germany. In 2008, another German artist, Johannes Kreidler, composed a 33 second song mashing up over 70,000 songs. As part of German copyright law, a form had to be filled out for each and every sample used and sent to GEMA, a German copyright collective. He filled out each and every single one of the required forms and showed up at GEMAs doors with the whole truckload of papers. Video of the event (German dialogue only): The idea was to not only protest how sampling is handled, but also question the validity of copyright in an internet age. Personally, I think it's things like this that major corporations who profit handsomely off of mainstream artists are deathly afraid of - alternative methods of obtaining music that offers music they don't own or control. Questioning copyright is one thing, but if both artists and consumers start to think that copyright benefits neither artist nor consumer and work to cut the major record labels out of the equation, that has the potential to really impact labels who refuse to use alternative business models. This is not to say something like this happens overnight because many large movements take time to build up. Still, it is interesting to see how much the open license movement has grown over the years in different countries around the world. [Hat tip: Gulli] Have a tip? Want to contact the author? You can do so by sending a PM via the forums or via e-mail at drew@zeropaid.com.

ZeroPaid Interviews the Free Software Foundation

Drew Wilson — Sat, 31 Jul 2010 06:51:48 +0000

Open source has been in the media for quite some time whether directly or indirectly. With ACTA leak and the ASCAP letter two big news items that affects open source, we decided to sit down with the Free Software Foundation and talk about these and other things related to the open source movement.

Update: Please see note at bottom of article with regards to the use of the term "open source" There are many things happening with open source. There are big news items that effect open source such as clauses in the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) and, what some have called, an indirect attack coming from ASCAP through the ASCAP letter. There are also issues that go under the radar such as open source adoption. With so much happening with Open Source, we decided to sit down with Peter Brown, the Controller and Executive Director of the Free Software Foundation to get his take on various issues. What is the Free Software Foundation and how is it important to open source? The FSF is a not-for-profit foundation created in 1985 to sponsor the GNU project and promote the worldwide cause of software freedom. Free software is about having control over the technology we use in our homes, schools and businesses. Where computers work for our individual and communal benefit, not for proprietary software companies or governments who might seek to restrict and monitor us. The GNU system that we developed with the help of a worldwide community of volunteers, is in widespread use today in the form of GNU/Linux: a combination of the GNU system and a kernel written by Linus Torvalds. Open Source is a different idea. The term was created by people in the free software movement that were concerned about appealing to the CEO's of powerful corporations, who didn't care to hear about our social movement's purpose of gaining computer user freedom. Today, more people know this history and appreciate the values of software freedom. Indeed, many representatives of Open Source organizations point to the Free Software Foundation's work and recognize that our mission is the core of their purpose. You can help the cause of software freedom by not participating in the corporate process of hiding the meaning behind this movement. Please call this work free software and not open source. Remember that the system is GNU using the Linux kernel, not just Linux. These are great and simple ways to make a difference and educate others. When people think of "free", some might think, "well, that means no one is getting paid and every contribution is voluntary to an open source project." A lot of advocates of open source I spoke to personally say that this is a big misconception about open source and people, indeed, do get paid while contributing to open source in various ways. Do you agree that free doesn't equate to no one getting paid from an open source perspective? Free software is about freedom not price. The FSF itself sells disks of free software. We are perfectly happy for people to make money using free software. So think about your freedom, not about making or spending money. Free software values mean no spying on your activities. Free software values mean no DRM (digital restrictions). Free software values mean no locked down devices. Free software values means sharing with your friends, making copies and learning about free software from studying the source code of the software you use--if you want to. A while ago, ASCAP issued a letter attacking various user rights organizations and, curiously, Creative Commons. They said that "copyleft" is undermining their "copyright". While Creative Commons responded saying that these claims are false and copyleft isn't undermining copyright because Creative Commons, in fact, is a copyright license. Some people took ASCAPs comments as being an indirect attack on open source, maybe because open source is viewed as part of the copyleft movement. First of all, do you feel that you are part of the copyleft movement? Secondly, do you think ASCAPs attack on Creative Commons was also an indirect attack on open source as well? Finally, what's your take on the ASCAP letter? The concept of copyleft was created by our founder and president Richard Stallman. The world's most popular copyleft software license is the GNU GPL--a software license published by the Free Software Foundation. So in fact we represent the founders of the copyleft movement. But we should be clear about what copyleft is. Copyleft is a technique that Stallman created to prevent free software from becoming proprietary software. It depends on copyright law, and it is composed of a set of permissions that the copyright holder grants to the user. It is not anti-copyright, though the FSF and many other organizations take the position that copyright laws have become to strict and overly broad and need major reform. ASCAP doesn't like these views because they conflict with their purpose: making as much money as possible off the back of our shared cultural heritage. The topic of software patents, as much as I can tell, has always been a very controversial topic for those in the open source movement. How can software patents, in your view, undermine the open source movement and, more broadly, undermine software development and society as well? Many corporations who represent Open Source love software patents because they own so many of them themselves. The free software movement rejects the very idea of software patents. Please watch the recent documentary film we sponsored Patent Absurdity. Advocates of software patents might argue, "Hey look, patents allows us to secure jobs and money for various companies and to be against software patents is an extreme position to be in that would hurt jobs." How would you respond to criticisms such as this? That the economic evidence doesn't support that finding. In fact, the evidence makes clear that software patents are a drag on the US economy as a whole and are a deep threat to all other nations if software patents get adopted internationally. The FSF sponsors a campaign against software patents and we present all the evidence about the harm that software patents inflict, including economic at EndSoftPatents.org. ACTA recently made its way in the media with news of its more recent leak. Do you think ACTA could potentially harm the open source movement? If so, in what ways is ACTA in its current form harmful for open source and software development? Again, many corporations that support Open Source have been silent on ACTA. The Free Software Foundation has spoken out against ACTA and is promoting a petition. ACTA encourages spying on computer users. It encourages internationalization of DRM schemes and harmful laws like the DMCA. It makes citizens wary of sharing, when sharing is what we want to encourage with free software. ACTA is simply another gift from paid-for law makers to an industry that hates technology that empowers citizens. Open source has popped up in the news here and there in fairly impressive ways. Different corporate and government organizations have made announcements over the years that they are switching to open source solutions. How positive are these types of announcements for the open source movement? Could you name a few particularly memorable announcements of organizations switching to open source? Many organizations are wary of announcing their use of free software, because proprietary software corporations like Microsoft show up to threaten and abuse them. They did this in Massachusetts when the State tried to adopt a policy of using Open Document Format. They did this to the One Laptop Per Child program when they were promoting their use of GNU/Linux. But Microsoft's power is waning, so more news is reaching the public. CERN's large Hadron Collider depends on GNU/Linux. The US armed forces have stated their dependence on free software for weapons systems. The NYSE trading platform is GNU/Linux based, and many other trading systems use free software. The White House uses Drupal for its website. And Wikipedia is served up using only free software. The list of high profile users is getting to be a long list. I personally have spoken to someone from within government who says that the big dissuading factor of an organization switching to open source is liability. The example I was given was if, say, Microsoft screws something up, a company can be blamed. If an open source product messes up, where does the blame go? How can open source overcome perceptions like that to help get more people to use open source solutions? Are there other perceptions from, say, businesses that you would like to lay to rest? If Microsoft screws something up it's just another day in the life of a proprietary software user. Microsoft isn't about to cut you a check to make it all better again. Having Microsoft to blame doesn't help you. Most organizations that use free software use a vendor who offers support and services. Free software makes it possible for anyone to get into the business of offering these services because the software gives you that freedom. It's great for local economies. Some people only know proprietary software. An example is someone saying, "hey, I know Microsoft enough to use it, why should I make this big leap to open source when all I want to do is get from point A to B." Open source, though, isn't solely tied to operating systems though. What would you say to that person if you wanted them to use more open source technology and where should that person go to find out about open source? Go to FSF.org to get an introduction and a pathway to using more free software. Using free software is great. But understanding and appreciating the values of free software is more important. That's why you should reject the term Open Source. What the FSF wants to talk about and what we want to pass on to your readers is an understanding of why it matters that you have software freedom. Why it's important for our society to build its future on a technology that we can control and that serves our interests. Think about the alternative future where free software doesn't succeed. Where a hand-full of proprietary software companies thus control all access to the internet. Where spying on your computing activities is assured. Where copying digital media files is prevented by pervasive DRM schemes. Where you're forced to do your computing on a corporation's servers: often referred to as cloud computing, or as we know it, complete spying. Where your rights that are lawful cannot be expressed because the software you use prevents you from undertaking those legal activities. And where competition is allowed to be stifled because these same corporations have collected thousands of software patents that prevent anyone else from changing the rules of the game. These examples may seem extreme, but companies like Microsoft and Apple are busy pursuing these outcomes and lobbying your government to help them. Is there anything you would like to add? Keep up to date by subscribing to receive the Free Software Supporter newsletter and alerts. Volunteer for us. There are many jobs to be done and you don't have to be a coder. The FSF receives the bulk of its funding from its Associate Members. You can become a member for $10 a month ($5 students) or donate at FSF.org.jf Happy Hacking! --- We would like to thank Peter Brown of the Free Software Foundation for taking the time to sit down and answer our questions. UPDATE - Important Note: This interview was conducted via e-mail where the questions were sent all at once and I received the answers all at once. Up until the interview, I didn't know the term "open source" was, in and of itself, a poor term for some. So for those concerned that I insisted on using the term "open source", this wasn't really meant to come off this way and I apologize for that. This interview was meant to be educational to the general public and it was even educational to me since I'm not as involved with free software as I am with general file-sharing, technology and even free speech. Rest assured, I got the message. For all intents and purposes, this interview is already doing its job of informing. Thank you for your concerns. Have a tip? Want to contact the author? You can do so by sending a PM via the forums or via e-mail at drew@zeropaid.com.

Open Source Alternatives for X Professional Software

Drew Wilson — Tue, 15 Dec 2009 02:29:12 +0000

The Open Source movement has always been present. Whether proprietary software seems to be gaining ground or not, open source has always been a very enticing alternative. The problem has been, how do people know whether an open source alternative exists or not? Here’s two websites that hope to change that.

If a user is sick and tired of some of the flaws of, say, Internet Explorer and they want to turn to an Open Source solution, the easy goto browser for surfing is FireFox hands down. In fact, FireFox does have what very few open source solutions have – a household name that most know about. Chances are, someone who knows someone who knows someone at the very least either knows or uses the famed browser. What about alternatives to, say, AutoCAD or Adobe Illustrator? That might be a bit more difficult to find.

Wouldn’t it make sense to have a website devoted specifically to having a directory of well known proprietary software and list all the open source alternatives? Actually, there are a handful of sites that do that sort of thing.

Open Source as Alternative or OSALT.com is one of those websites. You can simply type in their search bar something like Adobe Illustrator, then browse a list that appears to have some of the latest Adobe products, click on the software you are looking for, scroll past the description and you can have a short list of open source projects that is similar to the software you are looking for. For this example, we were able to find InkScape which appears, based on the description, to be a nice vector editing software that is open source and a potential alternative to Adobe illustrator. The page contains a right hand bar with a link directly to the Inkscape home page. It seems to be quite a handy website for those who are hoping to switch to open source.

Another website that tries to fit the bill for an open source alternative directory is Downloadpedia’s Open Source Alternative to Commercial Software page. Fittingly, it’s in a Wiki format which allows users to contribute to the site. It probably needs some help given how huge the page in question is, but one can simply use their browser to quickly search through the page. In FireFox, one can click on Edit, then Find and type in on that website, say, “AutoCAD”. The page points to two pieces of software and links directly to their home pages. One of those is BRL-CAD.

One of the problems with open source software like this is that design schools tend to teach the proprietary software rather than the free versions. This can mean that users who want to get over the learning curve of either choice either have instructor help with proprietary software or face their problems more or less on their own with the open source solutions. When it comes to open source and facing the problems on ones own, users aren’t actually on their own. YouTube have hundreds of thousands of tutorials on different pieces of software and open source is no exception.

Simply go to YouTube and, going back to the first example of InkScape, type in YouTube’s search for Inkscape tutorial. This specific example reveals a number of tutorials on the software in question.

Open Source provides an excellent opportunity for students because basic terms, in design for example, never change. A stroke will always be a stroke, measurements will be in picas, pixels, inches, etc. and layers will be layers. If one were to think about signing up for a program, even if they were to be learning Adobe Illustrator for example, learning the open source alternative even if it is for general purposes will really help understand fundamental principles in a given design project. The interface will no doubt be different and there will still be that learning curve, but that curve will more than likely shrink when one knows about the general ideas of design through learning the open source software.

There’s always the classic arguments for businesses to switch to open source alternatives such as it cuts down significantly on overhead costs. How much does it cost to upgrade over 100 machines to the latest software and properly license it? Wouldn’t it be great if it was possible to remove that cost? It certainly wouldn’t be very possible for the BSA to be coming after a given business for using legally free software.

Of course, such changes would never happen overnight – if at all. Still, that doesn’t mean one shouldn’t be aware of alternatives in the first place and it’s great that there are resources out there that will point a user in the right direction should that user choose to give open source a try.

Have a tip? Want to contact the author? You can do so by sending a PM via the forums or via e-mail at drew@zeropaid.com.