6 May 2008An Open Letter
To The Secretary Of Education
Of The Republic Of The Philippines
I am one of millions of Filipinos who find that the world of digital computing as a significant component of every-day living. As freelance graphic designer and Web developer, I am constantly dependent on either my laptop or my desk workstation. And as a commonplace bloke I also find the Web an indispensible tool for making life easy.
But as a student, it's too common to find myself wondering why I use non-free or proprietary software. I think everyone who is able to read this letter is aware that we as a country belong to the infamous Third World list. So, why are we using Windows XP, Microsoft Office, Adobe Photoshop, and whatnot in school? This question especially extends to the Philippine public school system. Why the heck are we paying for something, when a perfectly good—and in many cases a much better—alternative?
As I write this letter, I look at the real estate that my Ubuntu 8.0 LTS desktop affords me. It is fancy, with so much more graphical effects that Microsoft Vista offers at much less resource costs; I also notice how nicely I am able to type this letter in OpenOffice.org Writer; with a simple keyboard shortcut or a few mouse strokes and keys, I could also transport myself from my office to my favorite movie, to my social networking site, or to the increasing unread Email messages in Evolution Mail which has POP3 and IMAP access to Gmail, Yahoo! and whatnot. And that's just the beginning. I'd take up more than half this letter to list down all that I can do with Ubuntu Hardy Heron.
To be honest, I've been long using Windows myself. It was in 2006 when I first heard of Linux, from a High School teacher at the Ateneo de Naga University. As a curious computer-loving youngster, I Googled the Ubuntu. It surprisingly turned up support channels both community based and commercial. It was fun, finding out about Ubuntu. I leave it to the reader to investigate more by themselves, but I digress.
The question is, can we really afford not to have Open Source Software put into work? Some—no, in fact many say that it's complicated. Ubuntu doesn't have features powerful enough to do the things that we do. Nonsense. I dare say come and shoot me with anything that your school does in Windows that cannot be done in Ubuntu. Some more would contend that using Open Source users end up fising things more than using it. Again, nonsense. How often does the average University Dorm or computer laboratory reformat and reinstall their Windows in a month or a year? Too many to want to mention, that's what my experience taught me long ago.
How about support? In the United States and Europe, people have to give out their credit card numbers over the phone to Microsoft Support just to be put on hold and wait for a useless answer to a ridiculously simple question. In the Philippines, this cannot be done. For one, around one out of five Filipino computer owners use genuine Windows installations, and this includes schools, colleges and even universities. This means those four Filipinos are inelligible to official support. Taking out legal considerations, that is hardly a good bargain.
Let's take on the most common misconceptions and the FUD (Fear, Doubt and Deception) tactics employed against Ubuntu in particulat and the Linux Kernel in general.
Linux is free and therefore unsupported
Not true. In fact, there are 2 kinds of support (Commercial and Community) via multiple channels (Phone, Email, Mailing Lists, Forums, and IRC) available to anyone. Unlike Microsoft where you have to give out your credit card number every time you call them up, the Linux community offers free support and an option to sign up for a commercial support (Canonical for Ubuntu).
On Linux, you can't open files other people send
This is subjective and application-dependent. CPT, FLC, and ORG files cannot be opened and edited without buying and installing Corel, AutoDesk, and Lotus. These files aren't platform-dependent, they rely on a specific program for it to work. Proprietary file formats are the bane of the Open Source community, it forces users to stick with a single application. Widely used file formats are supported though and you won't have to worry about not being able to view a picture of your family or edit the spreadsheet that your boss sent you. It's ironic when Microsoft released XPS file format, you need to download and install a compatibility pack before you could create, edit, and view XPS files and you'll need to upgrade to Office 2003 or 2007 before you could get it to work.
After installing Linux, you still don't have an everyday application
This will depend on your definition of an everyday application because a default install includes an email client, a browser, a graphics program, and an office suite. Practically everything but the kitchen sink. And if you don't have the program you want, you could easily download it by issuing one command (sudo apt-get install program-name). On the other hand, OEM systems don't have a full-featured Office and Graphics suites installed (e.g. Paint, Works, or MS Office 30-day trial) and you'll have to buy them before you could use Office and Graphics applications.
Linux is a lawsuit waiting to happen
SCO, the current copyright holder of the Unix code has sued IBM with claims that IBM gave out proprietary UNIX code to the Linux community. Microsoft has used this situation to their advantage by scaring Linux users and, in effect, those planning to migrate to Linux that each and every single one of them are treading on thin ice and that a lawsuit is just around the corner. SCO has repeatedly threatened to sue anyone using Linux for copyright infringement. A Groklaw report, on the other hand, proved this by analyzing both UNIX and Linux source codes for any code infringed. The results, out of millions lines of code each, they found 326 lines of codes that was supposedly infringed by IBM and the Linux community, but further analysis showed that most of them are comments (and you can't copyright comments) or standard headers which define statements.
And it goes on and on and on
There are a lot more FUD spread out by opposition. Remember, FUD is a marketing strategy and if we don't fight back with factual evidence to disprove their claims, then we lose more than our freedom.
What do the people who say this know? This:
That Microsoft Windows is the ONLY Operating System
That Linux is a pirated version of Microsoft Windows
That Linux needed Microsoft Windows core components to run
That a computer cannot run without Microsoft Windows
That Linux has only been around for a few years
What do we get with Open Source, the Linux Kernel and Ubuntu then? The pros would be
GNU General Public License
Security holes are patched in hours
Critical bugs are fixed quickly
Free to relatively expensive
Modular design as opposed to Window's Monolithic design
Truly Multi-User and Multi-Tasking
Help readily available
We value your choice
Linux runs on equipment that other systems consider too underpowered
No DRM and no Trusted Computing... ever!
No monopoly
Near million applications available for download
Very Sincerely,
John Jeffrey Imperial
