20 posts categorized "FreeSoftware"

Thursday, 11 December 2008

iPhone to become openPhone ?

A rhetorical question, no doubt, but given the fact that Linux has already been ported over to the iPhone, this may not be too far from reality.

11-28-08linuxiphone While its still very rough around the edges, (read: no touchscreen drivers, sound, or WiFi / cell radio support), open source ingenuity has shown that it will only be a matter of time before it becomes a full fledged software framework for the iPhone platform.


The iPhone has been plagued by third party developer complaints, many of whom say that with the prolification of free (read: gratis, not open source) and 99-cent applications for it, higher value and more expensive applications are not selling that much. This state of affairs is partly due to the smaller catchment of iPhone developers, thus raising the cost of hiring them and resulting in higher priced applications.

Moving to an open source platform like Linux however would increase the pool of available developers, and serve to drive down these costs, which hopefully will lead to better lower priced third party applications.

Will Apple however ever open source the platform ? Let's not forget that this is a company which even refused to open up its hardware architecture in the 1980s, losing big time to the IBM PC and its clones over the next decade. They've since learnt their lesson by opening up their platform APIs, but have stopped short of open sourcing their code, though the excellent Mac OS X is based in the open source BSD operating system.

Or better yet, why not collaborate with Google and get Android running on the iPhone. That would be a Windows Mobile killer now, wouldn't it ? Early reviews of the Android powered HTC phones are showing promise that it can give the Apple product a strong run for its money, and with Google already open sourcing Android, third party applications will not be a problem. Will we see an exodus of iPhone developers to the Google-driven platform instead ?

After all, with Google's plans in this area, an Android app will have a wider market than handhelds and mobiles, for it could even run on the desktop with Google unveiling their capability to run x86 native code within the browser container.

That thought will make a lot of people drool, open source advocates and the consumer. Nokia's move to open source Symbian is perhaps a maneouvre to head this threat off at the pass, but they too would be well advised to start collaborating on this venture.

Enough brains working on this will lead us to move away from the traditional keypad/keyboard paradigm of communicating with the device. The touch screen interface has been a long time coming, and it takes a new approach to user interface design to make it usable and friendly enough for a lot of people.

And that, my friends, will change how we even use our desktops when it becomes ubiquitous.

Thursday, 04 December 2008

Nanchang, China mandates Linux

An interesting snippet of news swung by my RSS reader the other day.

Authorities in the southeastern Chinese city of Nanchang are requiring all local Internet cafes to replace their Microsoft Windows XP operating systems with a Chinese-made system, Red Flag Linux, according to officials and Internet cafe owners.

An official with the Nanchang Cultural Discipline Team, which oversees the roughly 600 Internet cafes operating in Nanchang city, said the new operating systems were mandatory. "We have already started installing the new software in all Internet cafes. All of them must have this new one," the official said.

While one may wonder if the main motives behind this move are less than noble for open source, given that it is after all mandated by the Nanchang Cultural Discipline Team, which sounds ominously like big brother. Nevertheless, this signals a growing move towards bringing open source desktops closer to the end user and to students.

If something similar were to be done in the town of Wuhan, for example, where there are many universities and colleges, you would be assured of a generation of graduates all well versed in using Gnome or KDE on the desktop. This would be a skill they would take to their jobs and to their homes, thereby further propagating the use of open source desktops.

While the mainstream media and the technology rags have stopped talking so much about open source adoption and its encroachment into the enterprise, I see a silver lining in this. It is not because open source is no longer the flavour of the day, but because it has become so common, it is no longer novelty news. The ubiquity which we have long sought, has finally arrived, one would say.

This however does not mean that the fight has ended. In fact, it should intensify, as with the economic recession looming, the battle for enterprise IT dollars will become much more closely fought. With its lower TCO, open source based solutions have a growing edge. We need to be cognizant however that complacency can only hurt the inroads we have made into the enterprise. We must strive to continue delivering higher quality systems and applications to stem the tide of proprietary software.

On the local front, it does seem like MDeC is now beginning to embrace open source within MSC companies and to promote those from within that stable who are open source companies. While this is laudable, I have been down the same path with them before, and that more or less fizzled out as MDeC lost interest. I wonder if they will have the staying power this time around, and have learnt the lesson of the past that it is the community which builds open source. A stronger and more open engagement initiative would be strongly welcomed.

MSC companies should also take the opportunity open source provides and use that to jumpstart their businesses in the software industry. Why reinvent the wheel, when there are perfectly good wheels you can take and modify to build the systems you need to deliver your customers ? Why forsake a global community of developers, users and testers who will assist you in doing just that ?

With the release of Android and Google's entry into the 3G/GSM handset market, even mobile communications is now open source ready and capable. I wonder if this will be taken advantage of, and Android based systems with its potential of harbouring thousands of third party applications will supercede the iPhone as the coolest handset to be seen carrying.

Time, and the effort and innovation required, are the only things which will tell on this.

Saturday, 27 September 2008

An Interview with MyMeeting Senior Developer

Abza...faking smile by eavayjavay.

MyMeeting (download here) is a web application specifically designed to help better manage meetings in government agencies. Initially developed at the Open Source Competency Center (OSCC), it is the first Malaysian government software to be released publicly under the open source BSD license.

We conducted an email interview with Abdullah Zainul Abidin, the senior developer on this project. The answers are below verbatim (with some minor formatting changes).

0) Tell us the story of how MyMeeting came about being developed. Who's brainchild was this? Who were the key developers? How many developers were allocated to work on MyMeeting? Was there management buy-in before development started? Was the development of MyMeeting conducted in OSS manner (ie open mailing lists, bug tracking software, public access to SVN/CVS/git etc)?

MyMeeting actually started life as a custom system for the management of decisions made in the GITIC committee. GITIC (Government Information Technology And Internet Committee) is a committee chaired by the Chief Secretary Of Malaysia that discusses the implementation of government IT policies and so it has members from every government agency in Malaysia.

Once the GITIC system was complete, MAMPU saw that MyMeeting could actually be useful to other government agencies too thus most of the customized for GITIC portion was taken and turned into settings which could easily be changed by the various agencies for their use. Then it wasn't really open source yet. We were using all the open source technologies (PHP, MySQL, Apache, SVN) but the development wasn't really open for all to see.

It was when we wanted to redo MyMeeting for MyMeeting version 2 that we saw MyMeeting is a perfect candidate for a completely Malaysian Government Open Source Software project. Most probably the first of it's kind. So yes, development of MyMeeting is conducted in OSS manner. You can access the bugtracker at http://trac.oscc.org.my/mymeeting, download it through svn at https://svn.oscc.org.my/mymeeting, register to it's mailing list at http://lists.oscc.org.my/mailman/listinfo/mymeeting-users and also
edit it's wiki at the knowledge bank http://knowledge.oscc.org.my/solution-areas/application/mymeeting.

1) MyMeeting was developed on CakePHP. What was the reasoning to choose CakePHP over other PHP frameworks? Did using an ROR-style framework help speed up development? Were there any problems faced when using CakePHP and how did the developers go about solving the problems?

The reason we choose CakePHP was exactly because it was an ROR-style framework. At the time when we decided to redo MyMeeting, there was a suggestion that we should use ROR especially after we saw Kamal's presentation on ROR at MyGOSSCON.

But I was worried about the learning curve that we would have to face and also considering the limited amount of time we have it was just not realistic to expect all of the OSCC developers to grasp a completely new language (none of us have any kind of experience with Ruby) and a completely new approach to web application development. I mean doing programming with the MVC concept after so long of mixed PHP and HTML hackery it certainly is very different. But I knew that we would not be able to go far with "traditional" way of developing php software. We have to overcome MVC.

So we choose CakePHP because it was marketed as clone of ROR. The initial learning curve of a new approach was pretty steep but once that was all over we find that it did help speed up development as it keeps things clean. Everyone knew where things need to go and where to look if there are problems.

2) Is there any plans to officially support PostgreSQL (and other free databases) in future versions of MyMeeting? Also, why the support for MySQL only in this release?

There is no "official" plans to support PostgreSQL and actually cakephp does support other free and non-free databases. Only there are some queries which we had to hack in as they are too complex for CakePHP. And to be honest we haven't had much experience with other databases. So if someone really needs it, or even gave us the patch to support it (hint,hint ;) we'd be more than glad to implement it into the main tree of MyMeeting.

3) Has there been any patches fed back from the FOSS community? If members of the FOSS community are interested in contributing to this project, where should they go to information on getting involved?

We had one patch submitted by SuMarDi that actually changed the theme of MyMeeting. It was really good. But as of date (11/09/2008) we have not yet put it in because he also changed some tags in the views so we need to make sure we don't break anything if we put it in. Apart from that we've got some good feedback from angch and he even updated the wiki in Trac.

We welcome any contribution and involvement from the community regarding MyMeeting. If anyone is interested they should first register themselves at the OSCC Knowledgebank (http://knowledge.oscc.org.my) and from there they can read up on the latest MyMeeting documentation (http://knowledge.oscc.org.my/solution-areas/application/mymeeting). They should download the source code and try out MyMeeting (the Knowledgebank would have information on how to do that). If they find some bugs or would like to suggest some feature they can do so at the mymeeting trac site (http://trac.oscc.org.my/mymeeting) by logging in with their Knowledgebank account.

They should also register with the mymeeting-users mailing list to keep up with the latest happenings with mymeeting at http://lists.oscc.org.my/mailman/listinfo/mymeeting-users. Apart from that, sometimes the mymeeting developers can be found in the #oscc irc channel on freenode. We'd be glad to help in any way we can so that the community can contribute.

4) Are there plans to integrate into existing legacy calendaring systems? Are there plans to integrate into FOSS calendaring software? How about integrating into existing proprietary calendaring software?

We have a vague plan of exporting the meeting calendars with iCal or something. But that is still a long way to go in the pipeline.

5) What is the roadmap for future releases of MyMeeting?

We haven't got a lot of feedback from the community yet as of where we should be heading. So most of it is only in the developers head of what next we should do. Yeah.. we're still very new at managing an open source project. It should be in trac.. :P

6) Why was the decision to keep MyMeeting development within OSCC before version 1.0 ?

That was actually the default way of doing things here at OSCC. We're actually trying to introduce something new with MyMeeting version 2 with it being completely open source and all.

7) Will future projects appear to the public prior to v1.0?

That would have to depend on the management.. :)

8) How is the team adapting to releasing the code?

We were pretty nervous at first. Not knowing whether our codes were any good and all. But we're okay now. Still got a long way to go to be fully disciplined in the open source way thought (release control and all) but insyaAllah we'll get there.

9) Management must be well educated to have the source code released. Was this an issue, and did you need advocacy sessions?

We are supposed to be the Open Source COMPETENCY Centre. :) So management should already know about the advantages of doing it in open source. We didn't need advocacy sessions.

10) How does your team / Management / OSCC / MAMPU rationalise the sharing of Intellectual Right of copyright and software patents?

We want Malaysia to be seen as a contributor of knowledge and technology to the global community.

11) How many seats has this been rolled out to (#Agencies / #Seats) and how much would this have cost for an equivalent commercial product?

There is at least around 6 agencies that is actively engaged with us to use MyMeeting. And since MyMeeting is freely downloadable there could be more out there that we don't even know of that's using it. Our current estimate is that it would cost at least RM 100K per agency to get something like MyMeeting commercially. So that's RM 600K at least already. :)

12) How much would your team foresee saving the Govt over the next 5 to 10 years from MyMeeting, and other OSCC products?

For MyMeeting? In 5 years maybe more than RM 15 million. If we can get all (and we mean ALL) of the government agencies and bodies to use MyMeeting. Not sure about the other products though.

13) Govt is cutting back on spending generally. Do you foresee that it will cut back on OSS investments?

Actually I think the right way to go is to put in more on OSS investments if they want to cut back. So I don't think they will.

14) Any new projects from OSCC labs we should look out for?

MySurveillance is rolling out soon. It is a HIDS system based on Prelude.

15) Can the private sector make use of the applications from OSCC?

Yes of course. But we won't be able to officially provide support though. We're more focused on government bodies.

16) Will OSCC provide support, or do they have recommended partners?

We would recommend partners wherever possible.

17) There have been cases where proprietary software vendors have opposed OSS initiatives by the government. Has there been any negative feedback from these vendors on the release of MyMeeting code, and if so, what has happened thus far?

No problems so far.


We would like to thank Abdullah Zainul Abidin for his time in answering the many questions. We are encouraged by the fact that the Malaysian goverment is moving so far as to open source its software projects. Indeed, the incredible interest from other government agencies clearly proves that the open sourcing of MyMeeting was a far-reaching wise investment. It has clearly allowed for efficient use of ICT resources by all, not to mention many millions of tax ringgits that are being saved through the choice of liberal OSS licensing. With their efforts leading to the promotion of OSS innovation and creativity, this initiative will surely lead to increased and sustained growth of the local ICT ecosystem.

Saturday, 06 September 2008

Let's complain about Microsoft restricting choice in the market (part deux)

Yoon Kit wrote about being forced to pay the Microsoft tax when buying computers from computer manufacturers (eg Dell). I submitted a complaint to the Ministry of Internal Trade and Consumer Affairs and received an official acknowledgment from the ministry that the Penang branch office will investigate the complaint.

I strongly urge everybody who uses non-Microsoft operating systems on their computers bought from Dell or any other manufacturers to write in through the web interface and make an official complaint. Make your voices heard so that we can stop being forced to pay for software we don't use!

State Chief Enforcement Officer,
Ministry of Domestic Trade and Consumer Affairs,
Tuanku Syed Putra Building,
Downing Lane,
10300 Penang.

(Dated: 15th August 2008)

Sir,

COMPLAINT ABOUT PURCHASING DELL COMPUTERS
DITESH KUMAR A/L SHASHIKANT

I am instructed to respectfully inform you that this administration has received a complaint where the complainant was asked to use Microsoft Windows from Dell Computers, which add an additional cost to the purchase.

2. For your information, the complainant does not use Microsoft Windows software and as such, does not ask for Microsoft warranty and hopes that the company in question does not add any extra charges.

3. In line with that, we would be pleased if your party could conduct the necessary investigations and inform us of any developments to this administration.

Your cooperation in this matter is much appreciated and we thank you in advance.

"SERVING THE COUNTRY"

Following orders,

Mazlan bin Haniff
for: Director

Aduan














Sep 9, 2008:

  • @Wu MingShi: Thanks for the better translation.

Wednesday, 27 August 2008

OpenOffice.org deployed in Malaysian Schools

300pxterengganu_state_locator Just announced today (27 August 2008), The Malaysian Administrative Modernisation and Management Planning Unit (MAMPU) and the Ministry of Education (MoE) are working with the State Government of Terengganu to further increase the adoption of Open Source Software in government and schools. This is announced at the "Open Source Software Seminar for Accelerated Adpotion" held at Wisma Darul Iman, Terengganu.

OpenOffice.org in Schools Pilot launched today by the Chief Minister of Terengganu supports the increased adoption of OSS and deployment for the upcoming generation of Malaysians. OpenOffice.org is an Open Source software alternative for office productivity software. The pilot phase in the state involves deployment to over 100 schools since January 2008. From January 2009, all 467 schools will start using OpenOffice.org in the state.

What is interesting is that the pilot project began early this year with little fanfare, and now 8 months on, over 100 of Terengganu schools have already upgraded from their old office suites to OpenOffice.org. What will be interesting is the future impact this would have, ala Philippines.

This, however is stunning:

Over the next 2 years, the Ministry of Education plans to build on this initiative and deploy OpenOffice.org in over 300,000 PCs in schools throughout the country.

300,000 PCs in schools nationwide will have OpenOffice.org. Why?!!!

The savings in licensing costs, support for open standards and platform neutrality and increased security from threat of document viruses of this software will provide better delivery of education services by students and teachers.

Thats why! Costs, Open Standards and Security. I love it that the Government is finally understanding the term "platform neutrality"! They are finally understanding that the "Technology Neutrality" stance is actually a powerful means of procuring the best value product and not tied in to any one vendor. It is definitely not an excuse of being apathetic on issues which are important to Malaysia's interests.

300,000 PCs would certainly be the largest deployment of OOo in the country. Well done to the Ministry of Education for going ahead with this. What is encouraging in that this is not just a MOU type announcement; they have been doing this consistently over the year and are only announcing this when there has been significant progress in the "pilot project":

The Terengganu State government has also setup a community training centre that has trained over 20,000 state citizens with IT skills using open source software on 585 Linux desktops.

This news is wonderful, and it highlights the domino effect with OpenOffice.org as the catalyst, as a FOSS solution are increasingly being used by government agencies. As this builds momentum, vendors will not be able to resist the demand for OOo to be pre-installed on all their machines. Instead of the dreaded Microsoft "Works" (a misnomer; because "Works" doesn't work) pre-installed, it would be infinitely more useful if vendors pre-installed OpenOffice.org.

Razif_2 The project is being implemented with the support of the Terenganu State Education Department with commitment and financial support from the State Government of Terengganu through the Implementation Committee chaired by B. En. Ahmad Razif bin Abdul Rahman the director for the Science, Technology and Human Resources Committee for the State of Terengganu. The implementaiton of this project hopes to achieve increased knowledge sharing and innovation for computer users with the optimum license and minimal cost.

Its great to have forward thinking excos like En Ahmad Razif who has the will to drive initiatives like this.

Adoption of the open source office suite, OpenOffice.org for state government agencies is now official in the states of Melaka, Kedah, Pahang and Sabah. States like Melaka and Kedah have been deploying OpenOffice.org and OSS since 2003. Most recently Pahang State Government has issued a circular on the states intention for all state agencies to migrate to Openoffice.org. Combined they have saved millions in ringgit for licensing fees, expenditure now spent locally to provide better public services in their respective states.

If you ever get the question, "How do you make money from FOSS?", tell them that's the wrong question. Millions of ringgit saved. Well done MAMPU. Well done Ministry of Education. Well done State Government of Terengganu.

I wonder what Microsoft Malaysia thinks of all of this.

Perhaps they were too preoccupied with the OOXML saga last year to notice the major changes in government choices?

yk

Tuesday, 26 August 2008

"Software Patents in Malaysia?"

In ComputerWorld Malaysia, next to the article about Linux in schools in Philippines, was this interesting box. Im not sure whether it was an advertorial, but it seems like a reignition of the software patent debate.

5 Minute Reading:01_profile_noriswadi
"Software Patents in Malaysia?"
by Noriswadi Ismail

Challenge me if this statement is quite misleading: "Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) within the Information Communications & Technology (ICT) industry in Malaysia is largely segmented". To quantify, ideally, most of the IPR components that hit the national headlines are mostly on infringement. And of all the decided cases in our national courts - are purely surrounded by invalidation and infringement cases - so much so, the ICT industry is still hoping for more development and progress.

There are some initiatives by Multimedia Development Corporation (MDeC) to suggest a move towards software patents. It was sometime, in the first quarter, this year; I had attended a well-organized conference by MDeC. Officials form the Japan Patent Office and Malaysian Intellectual Property corporation (MyIPO) were invited to provide their views and stance on software patents. There were invited consultants who impressed the attendees with their overall insights to - from basics to the advanced level understanding. During the wrap up session, I had personally opined:-

i) That MDeC and MyIPO should gauge extensive feedbacks, through a public consultation paper, from Malaysia's ICT stakeholders on software patents;

ii) That the result of the consultation should be diffused and disseminated to the stakeholders; and

iii) That MDeC and MyIPO should consult a well-coordinated forum with the Attorney General' Chambers ("AG Chambers") to consider such practice notes, guidelines or amendments to the existing Malaysian Patents Act.

Though these three (3) items may sound such a Herculean task, however, from the ICT industry perspective, it's timely for Malaysia to have its own stance. Putting the legal debate on patentability of software aside, for the time being, the ICT industry is hoping for a quantum leap that could stimulate software innovation culture. Some players may argue that software patent stifle innovation. To a certain extend, it has its merits. Arguably, the global software patents landscape are diversified due to its territorial nature of IPR protection and enforcement. Some countries allowed software patents. Some countries allowed software patents with conditional guidelines and some countries are very much grey on this subject matter. On this case, where is Malaysia heading to?

Assuming: If software are deemed to be patentable, the next challenge that will be faced by Malaysia's ICT industry is the monopoly of other competitors and big players. Whilst there is no competition regulations and laws addressing such concerns, perhaps, MDeC, MyIPO and the AG Chambers should add this in their must-to-do list in the nearest future. To move forward, my urge to all the readers - policy makers, stakeholders and ICT industry players, what do you think about Software Patents from other angles - business, economic and others? Your views are highly sought in shaping our public policy engagement in Malaysia.

Email me your thoughts at: noriswadi@heitech.com.my

The writer is a British Chevening Scholar and Group General Counsel / Company Secretary of HeiTech Padu Berhad.

Although this call for comments appears to be neutral, there are some issues which cause concern regarding Noriswadi's position:

  1. He only says that there are some countries who allow it, some who allow it with conditions and "some countries are very much grey on this subject matter." There is no mention that there are countries which have clearly rejected software patents, namely India, UK and the entire European Union.
  2. He seems to be calling out for more proactive moves on MDeC and MyIPO to re-invigorate the local software scene and "hoping for a quantum leap that could stimulate software innovation culture". Maybe a policy move could achieve the effect, but encouraging software patents I believe is the wrong way to go about it.
  3. He forgets to include are the most important stakeholders of this issue; the Malaysian public. We are unfortunately net importers of technology. We need the freedom to choose whatever technology available, be it proprietary to FOSS (Technology Neutrality). Software patents will hinder FOSS adoption due to scare tactics or legal suppression by patent holders. End users will have to bear the burden for artificial monopolies, legal and licensing costs.
  4. He does not elaborate on what actual benefits software patents would bring to the local ICT industry. He just says "To a certain extend [sic], it has its merits". Perhaps the merits and demerits could be elaborated on to give a complete picture for Malaysia to decide?

Wan_pengBack in 2006, PIKOM held a seminar on this very issue, and I had the pleasure to listen to and summarise talks by Ng Wan Peng and Deepak Pillai. Wan Peng was from MDeC, and she concluded in her talk entitled "Policy considerations in the patentability of computer implemented business methods"

 

Here are some interesting points from her presentation.

The MDeC report [in 2005] also noted that in the Malaysian Software Development environment, we are still a net importer of technology. It asked these questions,

Will Software Patents help:

  • increase Foreign Direct Interests?
  • reduce the deficit in Technology balance of payments?
  • reduce transactional and social costs?

For all three queries, the answer was a resounding 'No'. A strong legal framework is an important but relatively small criteria in selecting a country for investments. The other criteria comes from able workforce, stable government, language and cultural preferences and other major economic reasons. IP protection is important, but not as important as the rest.

In conclusion,

MDeC's position on Software Patents are:

  • Retain status quo: Software Patents are possible on stringent criteria: if it shows innovation and novel ideas
  • Business Methods are clearly not Patentable
  • and a review of position in 3 years time ...

I guess 3 years on, the 2005 report is now due for a review, and that is probably why we are getting renewed interest in software patents.

Deepak_1 Deepak's presentation  "Intellectual Property - Know your rights," was just as interesting;

He notes that Software patents are seen as an inhibitor of the production of  both FOSS and proprietary Software Development in Malaysia. Reason being is that it puts developers and users at risk of patent infringement suits. It also requries developers to conduct searches to be aware of existing patents before proceeding with development work. This is wasteful in both monetary, manpower and time resources. The USPTO system of granting software is open to abuse as registration is easily acquired and a challenge requires substantial financial capacity which not many start-ups have the deep pockets.

However Software Patents are not the cause of the problems facing the software industry now... its the ease in which the USTPO is awarding patents to the applicants. A regular mechanical patent requires detailed schematics and actual operational machines before it can be awarded to the applicant. However Software Patents just requires a 'concept' to be documented. No actual implementation in code is necessary! This provides huge leeway in terms of approval criteria and subsequently interpretation in enforcement. To me, it highlights the huge difference between Hardware (Traditional) Patents and Software Patents. One being undeniably useful, and the other redundant.

I had the opportunity to ask him: "Why do we need Software Patents to protect software? Does Copyright Law provide sufficient protection?"

Deepak immediately answered "Yes, current Copyright Law is sufficient in protecting Software Intellectual Property."

I do hope that En. Noriswadi's intentions are sincere in that he is looking genuine input from stakeholders. I do also hope that he is more sensitive to aspects of this debate from the FOSS perspective. More importantly he does his homework on the full benefits and disadvantages of software patents.

It is interesting to note that globally,  the software patent mess is starting to rear its ugly head yet again. In the EU, Charlie McCreevy is trying to legalise software patents with a US-EU patent treaty, and in India the Patent Office is working on a Draft Patent Manual to allow software patents.

200pxcandle_light_vigil2
Candlelight Vigil held to protest against
software patents on 23 Aug 2008 in Bangalore

... and it looks like Malaysia is also going to join the party.

yk. 

Monday, 25 August 2008

"23,000 Linux PCs forge education revolution in Philippines"

Interesting news from our neighbour Philippines - it was a two page article in the August edition of Computerworld Malaysia, page 18 entitled: "Open Education". I tried to search for the article in computerworld.com.my, but failed to get any results. However Google worked, and here is the article published online by Computerworld Australia: "23,000 Linux PCs forge education revolution in Philippines"

Here are some interesting bits of information:

With funding from the Japanese government, the PCPS program started around the 2000 timeframe when the contractors installed Windows PCs, but five years later it was discovered a lot of the computers were not being used because nobody knew how to use them.

There goes the myth that Windows is friendly and everybody knows how to use them. When it comes to education, its the first opportunity to teach kids how to do things. Not get them ingrained in only one way of doing things on one product.

Ricardo Gonzalez said, "The project dragged on for four to five months to a point where Microsoft matched the price by offering Windows XP for $US20 a copy and throwing in Office for $US30, but we still came out cheaper. Microsoft was also providing free training to high school teachers."

So even when Microsoft Philippines was authorised to slash prices (with questionable sales tactics of 70-90% discounts) for this project, Microsoft was still the more expensive option. Its funny because when it comes to the education of kids, there is no mythical "migration" costs, and therefore Microsoft's standard arguments of Total Cost of Ownership studies with retraining goes right out the window. In a few years, Microsoft will become even more expensive because of the "migration" costs from Linux to Windows X, and I wonder if that will be a factor in their TCO studies.

"Because we saved so much we gave the government 3000 additional units, so now another 300 schools have Linux networks," Gonzalez said.

From an initial contract of 10,000 units, Gonzalez provided 3,000 additional units. I don't know about you, but I'd figure that a 30% surplus in deliverables is certainly a key indication that Open Source is key in providing great value. What do you think?

The key part of the article to me is this soundbyte from Gonzalez:

"People in the government now understand Linux can do so much for so little outlay," he said. "In a brand new computer 50 percent goes to the operating system and office suite, so how many people can afford that?"

When you have a proprietary OS and the office suite factored into the price, it does come up to 50% of a price of a new computer. Why should this be the case, especially in developing countries in Asia? I highlighted this in my complaint on the Microsoft Tax post a few weeks ago.

23,000 computers deployed by a 3 man team is certainly phenomenal. Lets see of other countries around the region are moving in this direction especially in the education sector, where in the long term it matters most.

Well done, Ricardo Gonzalez!

yk.

Friday, 15 August 2008

Melaka City Council's OSS migration and savings

In our ongoing series of Free and Open Source Software deployments in Malaysia, OpenMalaysiaBlog is proud to highlight the efforts of the City Council of Melaka. They were one of the first few departments to migrate completely to OpenOffice.org (98% of their 300 hundred seats. They need to retain a few copies of MS Office for some difficult proprietary files). Back in 8 December 2006, the Mayor of Melaka, Y.Bhg. Dato’ Haji Zaini bin Mohd Nor, presented "Successful Deployment Of OpenOffice In The Public Sector Seminar" and was very enthusiastic about OpenOffice.org.

Although not as far reaching in terms of number of seats as Pahang and Kedah, the Melaccan story is interesting by itself as a city council looking for ways to reduce costs, increase efficiencies and promote Free and Open Source Software.

What is different about the previous two states is that Melaka is trying to migrate their desktops to Linux as well. Unfortunately there are legacy applications which are holding them back from migrating completely.

                     OSCC Case Study Awards 2008
                                    OSS on Every Desktop

Name: Hj. Mohsin bin Sarip
Government Agency:
Majlis Bandaraya Melaka Bersejarah (Melaka City Council )
Full Street Address:
Graha Makmur, No. 1 Lebuh Ayer Keroh
75450 Hang Tuah Jaya, Melaka
Postal Address:
Peti Surat 107
75720 Melaka.
Email: mohsin-at-mbmb.gov.my
Phone: 06-23264xx ext 13x / 019-6575xxx
Fax: 06-23104xx
URL: www.mbmb.gov.my
Type of Solution: Desktop Applications

Introduction on Agency
As a local authority with an orientation of service to citizens, MPMBB [Melaka City Council] has been the main driver to make historic Melaka dynamic, advanced and beautiful. Its administrative jurisdiction is in tune with the development of the whole of Melaka state, where focus is on sectors of agricultural, industrial and most recently, tourism. Infrastructure development is highly visible, competing with other advanced states in Malaysia. This situation accelerates the inflow of investors to put in capital as well as creating job opportunities to her population. Total number of staff at this agency is 840 people.

Mission

To make Melaka City Council the main driver towards the creation of a city that is dynamic, advanced and excellent.

Operational objective

  • Planting the spirit of loving the organization and working as one team with one destination towards creating an organization that is solid, dynamic and excellent
  • Executing duties and working to obtain keredhaan
  • Solidifying system and way of working to be more transparent, fast and accurate
  • Personifying workers who are dedicated, lively and diligent, united in loving MBMB [Melaka City Council)
  • Rallying the roles of the community and other agencies more effectively

Clients
Property assessment taxpayers, licensees, Council Members, compound payers, etc.

Project Objective

Every compute at Melaka City Council uses OSS technology

Key Partners

Senior Management

Mayor
Directs all members to use OSS

Secretary, Melaka City Council

Monitors progress of usage of OSS in the Council

Director of Information Technology Department

Ensures usage of OSS in the Council is implemented as planned by Malaysian Administrative Modernisation and Management Planning Unit (MAMPU)

OSS Technology Used

Operating System
Desktop

  • Ubuntu - http://www.ubuntu.com
  • Xandros - http://www.xandros.com
  • Redhat – http://www.redhat.com

Server

  • Centos – http://www.centos.org

Apache

  • Web server – http://httpd.apache.org/

Office Productivity

  • OpenOffice.org – http://www.openoffice.org

Purpose of Usage

  • Easy to install

End User usage

  • Office productivity: OpenOffice.org
  • Internet / Web browsing: Mozilla Firefox

Hardware and Applications

  • Desktop PCs:  ± 300 PC
  • OpenOffice.org usage: 98%
  • Operating Systems: Ubuntu, Xandros : 60%
  • 40% do not use OSS because there are application software which are not compatible like
    • MAPINFO, AUTOCAD, Sistem e-Kewangan, Sistem e-Pbt

Application Servers

  • e-Pbt – Oracle
  • Backup – Bak Bone
  • Stok – Php; MySql
  • Twincities – Apache;php;MySql
  • Logins – Centos
  • Mail – Redhat
  • Domino server – Redhat
  • Firewall – network box

Why use Open Source Software / Linux?

  1. Saves costs - RM120K a year saved from licensing
  2. Easy to maintain, and can be configured for end users needs with the availability of source code
  3. No virus attacks
  4. Less maintenance on PCs

How and why does OSS solve your needs / problems

  1. Security - virus free
  2. No additional costs for purchases of "upgrade" licenses
  3. No piracy

Effect of OSS Migration on the Agency and the public

  1. Agency saves costs
  2. The public receives better service
    1. Updated information
    2. Faster access to information
  3. Management of the Council is more efficient

Experience

  1. Users found difficulty accepting OSS in the early stages of implementation
  2. There are several applications operating in the Council which are not compatible with Linux
    1. MapInfo, AutoCAD, System e-Kewangan (Microsoft Internet Explorer dependent), e-Pbt System

Project Status

  1. Open Office - 98%
  2. Operating System - 60%

Testimonial
Name: Tuan Hj. Mohsin bin Sarip
Position: Director of Information Technology
Tel: 06-2326411 ext 134

What is great about this case study is the support from upper management all the way down to the end users.The enthusiasm by the team in Melaka is certainly commendable, and it looks like they are still going strong. This was what the Mayor said then:

"... I don't understand why some agencies may still be hesitant despite all the sessions MAMPU has conducted ... go back and convince your superiors on the benefits of OSS and OpenOffice.org, and that implementation is easy"

Now that we know that the State Government of Kedah has been migrating since 2003, and the State Government of Pahang has just initiated their migration, the growth of ODF adoption will now happen in a more organic manner, and in a few years time be the du jour standard especially in the public sector.

yk

Thursday, 14 August 2008

The State of Kedah moves to OpenOffice.org

080814kedah A case study submitted to the Open Source Competency Center by the Center of Information Technology, Office of the Chief Minister and State Secretary of Kedah, has indicated that OpenOffice.org has been installed in 70% of the computers in the Kedah state government agencies. There are currently 2,202 installed seats and by the looks of it, the numbers will just keep rising!

For the convenience of international readers, here is a translation in English of the case study (original was in the Malay language):

Project Objective

OpenOffice.org as office productivity software (1 PC - 1 copy of OpenOffice.org)

OSS Technology Used

OpenOffice.org

Desktop software is the main software for all computers of the officers and office staff. It is not specific to groups of officers or specific staff. The need and requests for desktop software has increased in line with the additional computers provided.

From cost analysis performed, 25% of the purchase cost of a computer is allocated for the purchase of desktop software which is Microsoft Office, where it should should be licensed according to the number of units purchased.

Taking into account the state government's financial allocation restrictions, cost saving measures have been implemented through the use of desktop software applications which is OpenOffice.org. It was first introduced in the year 2003 in several stages through the annual supply of computers for several departments. Purchase control was performed at the State Secretary Office (Kedah Information Technology Center).

Training courses under the State Public Sector ICT Cultivation Program was conducted along with the purchase controls noted above. Other  then email and Internet courses, OpenOffice.org was among the main modules for which training courses were given.

Project Specification

Each new computer provided by the State Government is only supplied with desktop software which is OpenOffice.org for the purposes of administration work by officers and departmental staff.

OpenOffice.org courses are open to all interested public sector personnel. At the early stages, attendance was mandatory. It was conducted by the State Information Technology Center.

System Usage

OpenOffice.org was used as the main desktop software for daily state administration work.

Software

OpenOffice.org 2.4

Why Use OSS/Linux?

  1. Cost savings for the government
  2. Avoiding non-compliance of the Copyright Act by government agencies
  3. Technology choices that are fit for purpose

Why and How OSS Solves Needs/Problems

  1. Percentage of departments owning computers and ICT equipment is still low
  2. Cost savings allows for more ICT equipment to be purchased
  3. Choice of technology on par with departmental users' need
  4. Non-compliance to Copyright Act can be reduced in stages

Effect of OSS Conversion on Agencies and the Public

  1. Number of computers supplied can be increased
  2. Increase in skills and knowledge of officers and staff in multiple desktop applications
  3. The spread of virii which is common through the use of MSWord file formats is reduced/stopped

Experience

  1. Officers and staff found it hard to adapt to equivalent features between Microsoft Office and OpenOffice.org.
  2. OpenOffice.org is more open compared to Microsoft Office. It supports multiple file formats and is not tied to Windows based files only.

Project Status

a) OpenOffice.org installation in government departments

Until today, computers supplied and installed with OpenOffice.org are:

Year 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Total
Computers 450 122 550 350 380 350 2,202

In total, it is estimated that 70% of all computers are installed with OpenOffice.org software. This policy is continued in line with the efforts of the State Secretary so that government departments take cost savings measures.

b) ICT Cultivation Program (OpenOffice.org)

Till 2008, 1913 people were exposed and given training to OpenOffice.org.

Testimony

Name: Ahmad Bawadir Bin Haji Abdul Ghani
Post : Director of Information Technology for the state of Kedah
Telephone: [omitted]

What is surprising is that the migration to OpenOffice.org occurred way back in 2003, and this looks like a pretty extensive long term project. It also is good to know that they are consistently covering 10-15% of their users per year. This would mean they would need another two more years to fully migrate over to OpenOffice.org.

Kudos to Ahmad Bawadir and team in Kedah.

The original case study in Malay is as follows:

Kedahsuk1_2










































Kedahsuk2












[Update 3:35am 16 August 2008: Thanks to MingShi for the better translations!]

Wednesday, 13 August 2008

The entire State of Pahang moves to OpenOffice.org

080813pahanglogo_2

300pxpahang_state_locator Its just been made official that the State of Pahang is migrating all its productivity suites to OpenOffice.org. This succint memo from the State Secretary of Pahang entitled "Perlaksanaan Penggunaan Perisian OpenOffice.Org Di Semua Agensi dan Pentadbiran Negeri" (translated: "Implementing the use of OpenOffice.org suite in all State Agencies and Administrative centres") outlines the reasons for migrating, the benefits and how to proceed.

Here's my rather rough translation from Bahasa Malaysia to English. Apologies in advance (corrections are welcomed):

Distributed to:

All State Head of Departments

All District Officers

All Head of Units
Secretariat Office for the government of Pahang

Implementing the use of OpenOffice.org office in all state agencies and administration

1. Purpose

1.1 The purpose of this memo is to ensure the usage of OpenOffice.org for office automation in the administrative offices of the State of Pahang.

2. Background

2.1 OpenOffice.org is one of choices of software for office administration or Office Suite. It features and integrated suite for word processing, spreadsheets, slides and database.

2.2 OpenOffice.org can be used in different operating systems like 'Windows', 'Linux', 'Solaris', 'Mac OS' and 'FreeBSD'

2.3 OpenOffice.org is distributed for free and represents a suite which is on par with other office suite software applications.

2.4 The main objectives for the use of the OpenOffice.org suite are:

2.4.1 It is easy to use and ensures that civil servants are not left behind in the ICT field;

2.4.2 It encourages civil servants to use the latest software available to help and facilitate daily tasks;

2.4.3 To help the State Government save ICT costs; and

2.4.4 To encourage the use of software based on open source.

2.5 Additional advantages of using OpenOffice.org are:

2.5.1 This suite is easy to obtain and distributed for free

2.5.2 It is an integrated suite. All the needs for office work, from typing letters, preparing charts, preparing presentations, saving data and other uses of office documents can be done using OpenOffice.org

2.5.3 OpenOffice.org can read file formats like DOC, XLS, PPT and files created by Microsoft Office from previous to current versions. It can also save in Microsoft Office formats;

2.5.4 The OpenOffice.org file formats are small because it uses XML compared to other software which uses binary formats; and

2.5.5 The cost savings from the ICT maintenance can be realized, as this suite does not require paid licenses.

3. Implementation

3.1 Usage of OpenOffice.org is encouraged for all civil servants who use ICT devices supplied by the State Government in all offices of the State of Pahang

3.2 All Head of Departments are required to ensure that the implementation of the usage of OpenOffice.org suite occurs smoothly and all computers in departments should be prevented from using any form of software that does not have a valid license. The State Government will not be responsible in the event that an audit finds software in use without a valid license.

4. Effective Date

4.1 This circular is in effect from the date of this letter (7th August 2008)

"Serving our Country"

*signed*

Dato' Muhammad Saifan bin Ismail, DSAP., DIMP., AAP., AMP)

State Secretary of Pahang

The driving force for this migration seems to be cost of proprietary software and the fear of unlicensed software. OpenOffice.org is the obvious solution to these two pressing problems (thanks, BSA!) What is good is that they have chosen ODF by default, and they are not changing the file format to the binary proprietary ones.

What is interesting is that the public sector in Malaysia is moving towards FOSS independently from any government directive or mandate, so no amount of whining would derail our government from choosing and making their choice. Its a simple business decision, and the market has decided.

State Governments are faced with the reality that software costs money, and they would rather use the money saved with FOSS rather than flashy and bloated software, on better things.

Now I wonder if tomorrow, Microsoft will 'extend' their RM99 Microsoft Office Home & Student license for 3 computers to these Government officials now. Or maybe even better;  USD5 per seat? Any takers?

Bye bye fat margins, you've been commoditized!

yk

[Update 9:45am 14 August 2008: Thanks to MingShi for the better translations!]

Continue reading "The entire State of Pahang moves to OpenOffice.org" »

Tuesday, 12 August 2008

Let's complain about Microsoft restricting choice in the market

What we have learnt throughout the two years with the OOXML / ODF issue, is that Microsoft always complains about the need to have a "Technology Neutral" outlook in policies and to "Let the Market Decide" as it whinges to government officials. 

What is ironic or ... hypocritical is the fact that they have made it so that their products are mandated in every new PC sold by manufacturers. Or else face the wrath of the BSA. I guess its the legacy of having Malaysia as the nexus of pirated software, where every unpaid software copy is automatically assumed to be illegal.

Fortunately times have changed. We should be more sophisticated now to realise that an unpaid copy of an application may not be pirated. It could be totally legitimate as a licensed Free and Open Source Software.

If you need to purchase a new PC for your office, which requires reliable service, support and warranty on parts, you would need to approach reputable companies like Dell, HP or others. What is restrictive is that they do not sell machines where the Operating System is optional, especially for desktops.

I have been using Ubuntu exclusively on my laptop coming up to two years now. Linux has come to a stage where I don't have to use ANY software which requires Windows in a separate boot partition. I can run all my office work and be extremely productive on a Linux desktop.

I do not need Windows. I do not need NT, 2K, XP, and most definitely Vista.

I would like a choice to purchase a PC from Dell without having to pay the additional RM300 for Microsoft software. I don't need IE, MS Works, Media Center, nor all the other bloatware which comes pre-installed just to get the machine to be protected and to be remotely functional.

Unlike Yasmin Mahmood (MD of Microsoft Malaysia) who only believes in an illusion of choice; "Its not about choosing but about having a choice", I think its is totally about having a choice, and choosing your preferred option.

So I decided to write in. I believe if consumers have been artificially restricted in their choice, or that vendors are collaborating in creating uncompetitive markets, this is a problem which can only be fixed by complaints against these vendors through government regulatory bodies.

In the Ministry of Domestic Trade and Consumer Affairs (KPDNHEP), there is an "eAduan" system which is online.

This eAduan System is developed and implemented with one primary objective   in mind: to provide an Internet medium of receiving complaint from the public.

By having this system, it is hoped that it will ease affairs between public   and KPDN & HEP. For your information, this system is made available beginning   14th June 2004.

All complaints shall be investigated and complainants information shall be   made confidential. Please do not hesitate to contact us if there is no response   or feedback within 3 days.

I am not sure how efficient the service is, but we can only test it out. The fields required is about average for a government website. It took me less than a minute to fill in the particulars, and a few minutes to compose the complaint itself. It looked something like this:

Dell3

I couldn't find an appropriate "Complaint Category" for "more choice", so "No Price Tagging" was the closest candidate. After filling in the information, an email confirming the "aduan" will be sent to your account, and this reassuring page will appear:

Dell4

The content of my complaint was something like this:

Dell restricts users in purchasing computers. I intend to install Ubuntu on my new computer, which means I do not need to have Windows Vista as an operating system (OS) installed in the system. The price of the Windows OS can cost up to 30% of the purchase. This is a cost which should be optional.

Ubuntu is a valid alternative, and even Dell USA sells machines preinstalled with Ubuntu for over a year already. Dell Malaysia does not have that option yet.

My consumer rights are restricted as there is no option to 'opt-out' of the inclusion of the Windows OS. I do not expect Dell to provide software support as my team and I are technically competent to self support the systems. I only expect Dell to provide support on hardware failures.

Offering Ubuntu as an option not only reduces the cost of computing, but also discourages piracy, as it comes with a multitude of productivity software which makes my computer fully functional at zero cost.

Wouldn't it be interesting if the KPNHEP received a deluge of requests from Malaysian users of Gentoo, Fedora, Ubuntu, Mandriva, CentOS, openSUSE, openSolaris, FreeBSD, NetBSD and the thousands of other alternative OS's for manufacturers like Dell, HP, Acer or Lenovo to offer, or at least allow the opportunity for us to "opt-out" in purchasing Windows preinstalled?

I know some cynics out there would say that companies like Dell would never budge, either "it doesn't make business sense" or "50% of their marketing budget comes from Microsoft". But lets make it a consumer rights issue, a pressure external from their companies, and then they will HAVE to conform to our needs.

If you think this is worth doing, please spend 5 minutes filling in this form, and help get the FOSS community heard. Its about time we have the choice to choose not to pay the Microsoft tax. Let the market decide. Long live Technology Neutrality.

yk.

ps. I would like to make it clear that I have nothing against Dell per se, I chose them in this complaint because most of the computers I purchase are from them, and I will purchase more if they give me the choice I so deserve. I want them to improve to compete better. This is also a true and sincere complaint.

Tuesday, 03 June 2008

A Memo to Patrick Durusau (Part Deux)

When Patrick Durusau wrote that Microsoft had no opposition to ODF, he was indefensibly and gloriously wrong. Those of us involved in national standards bodies and on government policy panels have had the dubious honor of having to defend against Microsoft's desperate attempts to kill any possible introduction of ODF as a voluntary standard. Perhaps even worse was having to witness first hand Microsoft making loud complaints against any internal government policies of the usage of ODF and any software which uses ODF (OpenOffice.org being the most prominent). And, of course, many of us have faced the intense lobbying campaign carried out by Microsoft against open source governmental policies.

So when Yasmin Mahmood, Microsoft Malaysia Managing Director, made the famous statement that "It's not about choosing, but about having a choice" with reference to ODF and OOXML, we assumed this was a new chapter in Microsoft history.

Then came along a recent blogpost by Harisfazillah Jamel, "Apabila Membuat Pilihan Dipersoalkan / When Choices are Questioned", on the right of government agencies to make choices. It's written in Malay, but it has been translated by Yoon Kit for the benefit of our international readers. It makes for extremely interesting reading on the pressure Microsoft Malaysia is placing on a government agency because of their choice to use OpenOffice.org/ODF over Microsoft Office:

Apabila Membuat Pilihan Dipersoalkan (When Our Choices Are Questioned)

Ada yang sebuah syarikat ICT yang kononnya mempunyai satu lagi standard bagi satu perkara adalah satu pilihan kepada pengguna. Sedangkan pengguna, mana-mana pengguna juga faham, standard, mempunyai standard bermaksud kita telah membuat pilihan, membuat satu pilihan daripada pelbagai pilihan yang terbaik untuk pengguna.

There is an ICT company which has one more standard for one more application for one more choice for consumers. While consumers, many users understand standards, having standards means we have made a choice, a choice which  is the best for users from many options.

Wakil mereka di Malaysia dalam satu muka surat sebuah akhbar menyatakan, kejayaan mereka mendapatkan iktiraf standard bagi satu format adalah satu pilihan kepada pengguna. Teruskan membaca, apabila membuat pilihan bukan kehendak mereka, adalah bukan pilihan mereka.

Their Malaysian representative, in a page of a newspaper stated that their success of having the standard as a format is yet another choice for users. Read it, if we make a choice not to their liking, it is not their choice.

Lalu sebuah agensi dalam kerajaan Malaysia telah membuat pilihan. Membuat pilihan bukan dalam kehendak syarikat ICT tersebut. Pilihan setelah panjang membuat penilaian. Pilihan atas dasar untuk memberi sokongan dan pilihan kepada agensi-agensi lain. Pilihan yang dibuat atas kehendak sendiri tanpa  tekanan mana-mana pihak. Pilihan yang dipesetujui diperingkat pengurusan tertinggi hinggalah keperingkat bawahan.

An agency in the government of Malaysia had already made a choice. The choice was not the choice of the said ICT company. The choice was made after a long study. The choice was based on principles to bring support and choice to other agencies The choice was made on its own needs without any pressures from any party. The choice was agreed by the highest level of management to the lowest level.

Sekarang timbul isu, syarikat ICT itu tidak senang dengan pilihan yang dibuat oleh agensi itu. Mereka merasakan agensi ini mahu menentukan dasar yang keras terhadap pilihan yang telah dibuat. Oh ya betul, mereka tidak senang dengan pilihan yang dibuat oleh sebuah agensi kerajaan Malaysia dan mula menjalankan kerja-kerja melobi untuk memaksa agensi ini, menurunkan maksud polisi penggunaan standard yang telah dibuat oleh agensi ini.

Now this issue has surfaced. The ICT company is not happy with the choice that was made by the agency. They felt that the agency wants to set a policy which is incompatible with the choice that they prefer. Oh that is true, they are not happy with the choice that was made by an agency of the Malaysian Government and have started work lobbying to force this agency to dampen the meaning of the policy of using standards that was announced by this agency.

Polisi yang telah disusun, dibincang dengan panjang lebar dan diluluskan dalam pengurusan tertinggi agensi ini mahu diubah oleh syarikat ICT tersebut kerana ia tidak menepati pilihan yang kehendak mereka. Bahawa diingatkan polisi ini adalah khusus hanya untuk agensi ini supaya memudahkan pelaksanaan atas satu standard. Itu maksud tujuan standard, memudahkan pelaksanaan kepada satu pilihan.

The policy that was prepared, was discussed widely and in detail, was approved by the highest level management of this agency, is to be modified by the said ICT company because it is not inline with their needs. Whereas it is reminded that this policy is specifically for this agency such that it  can easily implement one standard. That is the meaning and purpose of a standard, the ease of implementing one choice.

Yang buat saya marah, adalah teknik yang saya panggil, kilas tangan dengan kasar memaksa agensi ini tukarkan polisi agensi ini. Ya memaksa, walau apa pun cara yang digunakan, bagi saya ia masih panggil ia memaksa, agensi ini tukarkan polisi dari segi pelaksanaan.

What makes me angry is  what I call their heavy handed technique of forcing the said agency to change its policies. Yes force, by any means possible. I still call it force, to get the agency to change its policies on implementation.

Bagi saya, campur tangan dalam urusan sebuah agensi kerajaan Malaysia terutama melibatkan polisi, dan nyata sekali polisi ini adalah untuk penggunaan agensi tersebut oleh sebuah syarikat luar negara merupa satu campur tangan asing... Sebuah bentuk penjajahan ...

For me, their intervention in the business of an agency of the Government of Malaysia especially when it involves policies, and especially when this policy is stated for the use of this agency, by a foreign company represents ... a form of colonisation ...

Siapa mereka untuk tentukan dasar dan pentadbiran sebuah negara.  Saya sebagai rakyat Malaysia cukup marah dengan campur tangan sebegini. Perkara ini telah lama diperhatikan sejak daripada melobi penerimaan standard yang kononnya adalah satu pilihan.

Who are they to define the policies and the running of a sovereign country. I, as a Malaysian citizen, have enough with their interference of this nature. This behaviour has long been witnessed ever since the lobbying efforts of the standards which is claimed to be yet another "choice".

Saya tidak akan duduk diam dengan bentuk penjajahan cara baru ini. Saya tidak akan berhenti menulis dan berkempen untuk mendedahkan apa jua yang dilakukan oleh syarikat ICT ini untuk terus memaksa penggunaan produk mereka.

I am not going to sit quiet with this new form of colonisation tactic. I am not going to stop writing and campaigning and resist any action by this ICT company which forces the use of their products.

Banyak sudah duit rakyat, duit rakyat mengalir keluar daripada Malaysia, hanya untuk pembayaran lesen. Pembayaran hanya atas kertas, tiada hasil kepada kita rakyat Malaysia, hanya menjadikan syarikat luar negara atau individu luar negara lagi kaya.

Too much of our citizens money, money of the people has flowed out from Malaysia, only to purchase licenses. The payment is only for paper, without any value to us Malaysian citizens, only to make a foreign company or individual foreigners rich.

Sedangkan duit yang berjuta-juta itu boleh dialirkan kepada industri ICT negara kita dalam bentuk pelaksanaan sistem sokongan, penyelidikan dan pelaksanaan kepada aplikasi sumber terbuka atau Open Source Software.

If only the multi-millions of riggit could flow to our ICT industry in the form of system support, research and implementations in Open Source Software.

Mengapa perlu kayakan orang lain sedangkan rakyat ini yang membayar cukai tersebut perlu lihat sahaja duit itu keluarkan. Sedang sudah ada pilihan, pilihan yang setelah dikaji, boleh mendatangkan faedah yang banyak kepada rakyat Malaysia.

Why must we make other people wealthy while citizens have to pay the tax. Just see the expenditure. While there is already a choice, a choice that has been evaluated which can bring much benefits to the citizens of Malaysia.

Polisi dan dasar sudah ada. Mengapa tidak sokong? Soalan yang hendak tanya kepada ahli-ahli politik negara kita ...

The Policies are already defined. Why is there no support? These are the questions which need only be asked to the politicians of our country ...

Apa yang saya tulis ini adalah pendapat peribadi, akan tetapi saya mahu ia dipandang  serius oleh banyak pihak. Lama mana kita mahu dijajah ... ???

What I have written is just my personal opinion, but I want this viewed seriously by many. How long do we ever want to be colonised ... ???

Sunday, 01 June 2008

A Memo to Patrick Durusau

I really must commend Patrick Durusau's innate capability of writing the most inflammatory and outrageous publications, publications that are so divorced from reality that one cannot help but think that the dude must be hoarding some seriously good weed to be able to live so completely within his own defined existence. His latest publication, "Not With a Bang, but With a Whimper", has been receiving flak from the collective open standards community for exactly that reason and rightly so.

Patrick writes that:

Signs the document standards war was entirely fictitious have been around for quite some time. Where was the Microsoft opposition to OpenDocument in standards bodies such as OASIS and ISO? Perhaps they forgot? Didn't get the memo?

Given that we at OpenMalaysiaBlog, as open standards supporters, have been at the forefront of receiving the brunt of their vicious (and often personal) attacks on ODF, I find Patrick's assertions as ridiculous and cockeyed at best, and deliberately offensive at worst.

Microsoft has been running an anti-ODF campaign in favour of OOXML for a long long time now. In Malaysia, their campaign started with opposition to Malaysia's proposed adoption of ODF ISO26300:2006 as a voluntary standard by invoking Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt on the ODF standard. The campaign continued on by personally attacking members of the technical committee who were in favour of ODF, by casting undue aspersions on their characters, in particular, insinuating that we were subversive agents of IBM intent on the destruction of Microsoft (apparently, anybody who supports truly open standards is a biased IBM agent).

In fact, during a technical standards meeting on ODF, senior management of Microsoft Malaysia printed out an unrelated and personal blog post from Yoon Kit (in which he was slightly critical of a Malaysian government agency whose representative was also present during the meeting), passed it around to all members present in the meeting and demanded for proper ethical conduct from members. That's right, folks - he printed out a non-technical blog post and attempted to cast a false and misleading charge on the character of a member of the technical meeting.

To the credit of the representative of the government agency in question and the chairman of the meeting, the meeting was quickly brought to order. The representative of the government agency did not have a problem with Yoon Kit's blog post but Microsoft Malaysia did. Note that this is not hearsay, I witnessed this first hand and was thoroughly shocked at the extent Microsoft would go to destroy any perceived threat to their Microsoft Office cash cow. The Microsoft Malaysia representative in question also distributed printed blog posts from OpenMalaysia and circled the name of a member of this blog who also happens to be an IBM employee, insinuating to all that members of OpenMalaysia are influenced by IBM in pushing for a pro-ODF stand. This happened during a meeting to discuss the technical aspects on ODF!

That particular meeting was followed by an anonymous smear campaign against one of the TC members. A letter was faxed to the organization of the TC member in question, accusing the TC member in question of helping politicize the issue (which is, of course, untrue). I too had the dubious pleasure of hearing first hand how Microsoft attempted to remove me from the TC (they did not succeed, thanks to integrity and cojones of the organization I am affiliated with).

If this unethical behaviour by Microsoft was not sufficiently despicable, they did the unthinkable by involving politics in what should have been a technical evaluation of the standard by writing to the head of the Malaysian standards organization and getting its business partners to engage in a negative letter writing campaign to indicate lack of support of ODF in the Malaysian market. Every single negative letter on ODF received by the Malaysian standards organization was written either by Microsoft, or a Microsoft business partner or a Microsoft affiliated organization (Initiative for Software Choice and IASA).

That's right, Patrick, every single negative letter on ODF can be traced back to Microsoft. And you ask where was Microsoft's opposition to ODF? Here is a letter by Yasmin Mahmood, Microsoft Malaysia Managing Director to the head of the Malaysian standards organization, opposing ODF as a voluntary standard (note that I have digital copies of all the letters in questions, if you wish to read them):

Yasminletter2

Yasminletter3


Yasminletter4

Yasminletter5

Yasminletter6

Patrick, you write that:

Need more? Watch the reaction to this announcement by Microsoft. Remember the cry has been that Microsoft should adopt OpenDocument. Microsoft has now adopted OpenDocument and it will be devoting resources to its development. For those unfamiliar with the concept, that means Microsoft will be making a positive contribution to the ODF development effort.

My recommendation is that everyone put up their noise makers and welcome Microsoft to the OpenDocument community and prepare to work with them to advance its development

Patrick, you make the assumption that those who are opposing OOXML are doing it solely because we oppose Microsoft. You couldn't be more wrong and I think it's high time you recognize the most excellent effort by many parties in helping improve the OOXML specification.

Yoon Kit and myself have spent countless weekends and many, many, many man hours finding ways of improving the proposed standard. My report to the TC, based on the reading made of the proposed standard, have always been on a solely technical basis, and Patrick, you of all people, should accede to the fact that there are/were severe technical deficiencies in the proposed standard and that input from members of National Bodies helped improve the specification.

The campaign against Open XML was at its start, in the middle and at the end an anti-Microsoft campaign. The merits or demerits of Open XML were simply a convenient launching point for criticisms of Microsoft.

Making the dangerous argument that "the merits or demerits of OOXML were simply a convenient launching point for criticisms of Microsoft" works to undermine the important constructive value of  criticism, which is to improve the proposed standard in question. The logic you have employed, that any attempt to criticize the technical deficiencies in OOXML is equated to criticism of Microsoft, is superfluous. By any measure, our criticism and feedback has helped improve the proposed standard immeasurably and you simply must recognize that, if intellectual honesty carries still carries weight with you.

Patrick, to further claim that we are solely "noise makers" does irreparable damage to value of the work we have put into improving the proposed standard. In fact, some of the decent folk at Microsoft (yes, they actually exist) helped arrange a conference call to Brian Jones, whose input helped clarify some the issues I was attempting to understand. I subsequently revised my technical contribution to the TC based on the clarification by Brian Jones. Your assertion that we are doing this so as to criticize Microsoft is an unfair charge and only serves to undermine your already dwindling reputation among the open standards community.

Now, when I was first told about Microsoft Office support for ODF by a Microsoft employee, my reaction was: "Awesome!". Then I puzzled for a minute over why they didn't do this two years ago and avoid opposing the passage of ODF as a Malaysian standard. In any case, the following day, I relayed this message to Yasmin Mahmood, the Microsoft Malaysia Managing Director, with an invitation for OpenMalaysia Blog to interview her on this positive and constructive development. I've not heard back from Yasmin on my invitation, but let me publicly assure the lady that the invitation is still open and we are committed to publishing the interview verbatim (word for word). Yoon Kit and I also offered to publicize the good work Microsoft is doing on ODF by running an interview with them. Brian and Doug, that invitation is still open if you choose to accept it by answering the questions we sent to you 11 days ago.

So all in all, Patrick, you owe us an apology for your thoughtless remarks, your unfair insinuations and biased connotations on our character.

Wednesday, 21 May 2008

Microsoft tried to be Open but failed. Miserably.

This post was actually meant to be a response to a journalist who asked what I thought about the February 2008 announcement by Microsoft on their "Strategic Changes in Technology and Business Practices to Expand Interoperability". To put into context, this was released on Feb 21st, the weekend before the BRM, so it was not particularly on my mind at that time.

In March, I got a call from the journalist to comment on this issue because they were going to feature it as Microsoft Malaysia was going to make a big re-announcement or something. I gave my thoughts, but never saw the light of day of my input, so I guess its now safe to post my comment.

Groklaw has an extensive list of quotes from far more qualified industry experts, but very few posts as end users from a developing country.

To recap, the announcement is Microsoft's promise in:

  1. Ensuring open connections to Microsoft’s high-volume products.
  2. Documenting how Microsoft supports industry standards and extensions.
  3. Enhancing Office 2007 to provide greater flexibility of document formats.
  4. Launching the Open Source Interoperability Initiative.
  5. Expanding industry outreach and dialogue.

I have personally experienced #5, however we have yet to see progress with #1, #2 and #3. #4 however is the most interesting for me. I mean "Open Source Interoperability Initiative". That sounds great! Does this mean that Microsoft is opening up to the Open Source was of doing things? I hope so!

Msinteropers

Unfortunately its not the case. The transcript of the Press Conference on this announcement reveals the rather major pitfalls (my emphasis):

BRAD SMITH: On the other hand, with respect to companies that are engaged in commercial distribution, or use internally, there is a need to obtain a patent license where there are applicable patent rights, and we're committing to make these patent licenses readily available. Novell already has an agreement with us that covers all of these patent rights. Some other companies, such as Xandros and others, also have a patent license. So they've already addressed all of that, and their users are already addressed. With respect to other distributors, and users, the clear message is that patent licenses will be freely available.

STEVE BALLMER:  Patents will be, not freely, will be available.

BRAD SMITH:  Readily available.

STEVE BALLMER: Readily available for the right fee. The basic economic analysis that you should go through sort of goes like this. We have valuable intellectual property in our patents, we will continue to view that as valuable intellectual property in all forms, and we will monetize from all users of that, not all developers, but for all users of that patented technology, all commercial developers, and all commercial users of that patented technology.

We also have trade secret information, which we will continue to protect, with the exception of some important trade secret information in the interoperability realm, which we will still value, but we will make available free of charge, so that people can do appropriate interoperability. So from an economic perspective you could say, in some senses, we're opening up. Yet, at the same time, we retain valuable intellectual property assets.

On reading the official announcement properly, this is clearly stated:

Microsoft is providing a covenant not to sue open source developers for development or non-commercial distribution of implementations of these protocols. These developers will be able to use the documentation for free to develop products. Companies that engage in commercial distribution of these protocol implementations will be able to obtain a patent license from Microsoft, as will enterprises that obtain these implementations from a distributor that does not have such a patent license.

11sept_director_arrest_c In a nutshell, they are saying that they will not sue "hobbyist FOSS users and developers" but they will sue FOSS distributors and enterprise end-users who fail to obtain a patent license from Microsoft. This is no bogey man. Its quite clear in the announcement, and the BSA is pretty active in Malaysia, not hesitating in sueing end user companies.

So here is my response as an IT Manager of a local manufacturing company:

As an Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) user in both work and play, I am happy that Microsoft has yet again reiterated their intention to move towards a more interoperable world. According to this initiative, they only provide covenants to FOSS developers for "non-commercial" distribution of implementations of these protocols. For customers of FOSS services, their local enterprise level support may require licensing issues, and this may hinder the local ICT growth of the FOSS ecosystem.

Will each reseller have to 'license' from Microsoft Malaysia? Additionally, this threat to sue in Malaysia may be moot, as software patents registered in the United States is not recognised here in Malaysia. There is therefore no case of infringing any 'Intellectual Property' of this type in countries outside of the US (except for Singapore, Japan, Australia and other countries who have signed on to the US-FTA agreements). Software Patents are vastly different to Copyrights.

As such, this is much of the same rhetoric we have heard from Microsoft since 2003, and I hope that they will show true initiatives of interoperability by adopting more open standards like CSS/HTML, which they recently have in  IE8, and hopefully also the ISO 26300 standard in OpenDocument Format in their office productivity suites.

What is sad about the Microsoft situation is that they seem to want to open up, but their reasons for opening up are not for the right reasons. This halfhearted approach shows in these 'so-called' initiatives. It is also evident that the reluctance to open up is not from upper management at all. Notice how Ballmer corrects Brad Smith. It appears that the vision of the CEO is not shared with the rest of the organisation. One side really needs to correct the other and re-align to better reflect the trends of today.

Here was a golden chance for Microsoft to gain some precious goodwill with the Open Source Community. Instead they botched it up just like they did before, again and again, cementing their reputation as the biggest and baddest anti-FOSS company in existence today.

How many other companies out there have such a anti-FOSS policies? Which company can be so unfriendly to their end users who prefer more choice? Why threaten when you should coax?

Anyway, that was my 2sen 3 months on. Every year Microsoft announces a new initiative for Interoperability. Hopefully next year they take genuine steps towards this goal and not just bandy about this rather overused term.

[Update: 1:20pm May 21st.
Here were Ditesh's quotes,  as an Open Source Developer, on this matter.

"Microsoft's Interoperability