Tampilkan postingan dengan label open source software. Tampilkan semua postingan
Tampilkan postingan dengan label open source software. Tampilkan semua postingan

Sabtu, 16 April 2011

Site gives students Web access to Open Source calculation Tools-Campus Technology

A small British company has launched a set of free open source calculation utilities for students. The bamboo Toolbox includes access to software that is developed by open source communities that runs in a Web browser hosted by Hughes Bennett education. If a student wants to save calculations, he or she can register at a "personal laptop" for a small monthly fee.

A dozen utilities create the current offerings, including:

R Project for statistical analysis and graphical modelingGNU Octave for numerical computationsMaxima for manipulating symbolic and algebraic expressionsObjective-C for the object-oriented features add to c routines.

"A major obstacle to the adoption of open source software in higher education is the cost of installing, configuring, and maintaining software. The result is that there are many excellent open source software packages for students, but they are not accessible, because students and higher education institutions do not have the money and staff in the difficult economic climate of today, "said Chi Nguyen, editor of the site. "Bamboo Tools removes that barrier by eliminating the cost of installation and maintenance. Now, students and institutions of higher education can be directly used the bamboo Tools software collection with their studies. "


A subscription of £ 2 per month grants the user access to a single laptop for a tool in the Toolbox. The laptop works like a wiki, allowing the Subscriber work done through the software, including previous iterations. Further information can be found here.

About the author

Dian Schaffhauser is a writer who covers technology and business. Send your higher education technology news to her dian@dischaffhauser.com.

Sabtu, 09 April 2011

NASA to Host Open Source Summit-Informationweek

NASA continues to support the open source community by hosting the first ever Summit around the technology.

The Agency's Ames Research Center in Mountain View, California will be the location for the two-day Open Source Summit 2011, March 29-30, during which NASA expects host engineers, policy makers, and members of the open source community to discuss how the Agency to strengthen its participation and contribute more to the sector.

NASA has several important objectives for the meeting, including a discussion of the challenges "within the existing policy framework of open source and [] to propose amendments" NASA's development, release, and use of software to facilitate, according to the Agency.


The Agency also hopes for the development of a formal way to support the cooperation with the public for the development of open source technology and explore its options and to develop software under various open source licenses, it said.

Other objectives are weighing the possibility for NASA to participate in open source software governance bodies and learn about best practices used by private organizations and other federal agencies to participate in the open source community.

NASA has a host of speakers for the two-day summit of both open source companies and suppliers coated with strong ties to it, including Mozilla Labs, IBM and Red Hat. The agenda includes sessions on licenses and Government restrictions, as well as governance and risk assessments, according to NASA.

The Federal Government is embracing open source technology as a cost-effective and flexible way to deploy Web sites and other IT systems for some time. In April 2010, the White House the first contributions to the community by donating code to the Drupal project, an open source content management system that WhiteHouse.gov is built. It followed that with the release of yet more software to Drupal in February.

NASA is one of the agencies at the forefront of the Government of open source push. The Space Agency contributed core technology for its cloud computing platform, Nebula, Open Stack, an open source cloud computing initiative launched last year.

Then won a project led by NASA in January, the full support of the Apache Software Foundation to strengthen development efforts around Java-based middleware called Object-oriented data technology (OODT), originally developed at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory. OODT used metadata so that end users to simultaneously influence of disparate and geographically dispersed computers and data resources, making cross-platform collaboration.

Government Technology Expo + Conference offers the perfect opportunity to connect with thousands of colleagues, colleagues and experts from the industry focused on driving government efficiency by means of the latest technology products and services. Join us in Washington, D.C., June 1-3, 2011. Register before March 11, up to $ 440 save at a Conference Pass Plus Workshops.








Jumat, 08 April 2011

Android violate the GPL? Probably not-OS News

IconIs Google's Android violate the GPL? This bold assertion created by Edward Naughton, and here and there on the web was picked up. The problem seems to be that Android's Bionic, a glibc alternative, presumably violates the GPL by stripping the Linux kernel header files of all the comments and other strange data and relicensing them under a more permissive license so that non-GPL programs can be written. Bradley Kuhn, former Director of the FSF and expert on violations of the GPL, believes that the way claims are exaggerated.

The problem arises from Android's Bionic, an alternative for glibc and uClibc. Bionic contains cleaned-up Linux kernel header files included with user-space programs can be. The raw Linux kernel headers are licensed under version 2 of the GPL; Google's cleaned-up versions, in which only "type and macro definitions, with the exception of a few static inline functions that are used to performance reason (for example, optimized CPU-specific byte-swapping routines)", are available under the BSD license.

According to Naughton, this is a violation of the GPL, and so this would have dire consequences for the Android ecosystem. "If Google's assumptions are wrong, and if the Bionic header files remain subject to the GPLv2, there is a significant risk that applications using them subject to the GPLv2 also be," Naughton argues, "on Android, all native code should compile against Bionicen at least in the view of the Free Software Foundation, compile code against a GPLv2 license library such as Bionic makes the code subject to GPLv2. "

He goes even further than that, and States that if Google is right, Bionic indeed licensed under the BSD license can stay, then it has unlocked the Linux kernel's GPLv2. "if Google is right, if it has succeeded in the removal of all copyrighted material of the Linux kernel-the Linux kernel has the headersdan of the limitations of the GPLv2unlocked ", he argues," Google can now use the "clean" Bionic headers to create a non-GPL'd fork of the Linux kernel, which under its own license terms can be extended. Even if Google isn't doing this yourself, it has to do the same. "

If this sounds overly dramatic to you, that's probably because it is. Bradley Kuhn, sort of the expert on violations of the GPL, takes a lot of the problems with the Naughton report. The full paper "Naughton gives some examples that a good starting point for a full analysis would make," he declares, "the worrying, however, that his paper is presented as a complete analysis. At best, is his paper a position statement of a hypothesis which then must be the actual experiment to figure things out. That rigorous research (as I continue to repeat) is still undone. "

Kuhn has been doing this kind of rigorous analysis before, so he knows what he is talking about. "For example, one of my first questions would be whether or not Bionic uses only components for Linux-headers that are required by the specification to write POSIX programs, a question which Naughton not even consider," he adds.

Kuhn also argues that Google's Bionic is not the first time someone came up with a way of cleaning the raw header files to be able to make something programmers use to communicate with the Linux kernel without licens their code under the GPL. If it turns out that Google has managed to ensure that the GPLv2 is not applicable to Bionic, then the success of Google is considerably more narrow, "Kuhn States," the success would only the extraction of non-copyrightable facts that a c library to know about Linux to make a run to binary when Linux as the kernel is under. Now, should be duly noted that there are already two libraries under the LGPL which already implemented that exist (namely, glibc and uClibc-the last of the Naughton cursory examination which apparently doesn't even show up). "

Kuhn successfully argues that this everything looks like a storm in a teacup look like. It was clearly not Google's intent to violate the GPL, so even that if mistakes are made, they will be easily clarified. "If someone actually all the research to prove that Google did [accidentally take a copyright-infringement short-cut], I would easily a 1000-to-1 bet offer to anyone who is this a violation of the copyright can be easily clarified, that Bionic continues as a tolerant licensed c library for Linux work zouen the effects of the whole thing would not go beyond: ' it is possible to write your own c library for Linux that is not covered by GPLv2 '-a fact that we are all for a decade and a half have known anyway, "he explains.

We'll see what such a thorough investigation would show up, but the fact that someone like Kuhn skeptical about the whole thing is doesn't bode well for Naughton claims.

Kamis, 07 April 2011

Open sourcers summoned to take dancing poultry license registry

In an attempt to revolutionize the world of open source, has a supporter of free software a new license for the Open Source Initiative. The document is two years in the making, and known as the CDL, short for Chicken Dance license.

"The purpose of this license to intellectual property is much more fun to deal with, writes" Andrew Harris, the author of the license. "Place of boring old GPL-violations or license agreements for GPL software, [a] entertaining video of people do the chicken dance is produced. If this was sued, perhaps even run CDL offenders retroactively the chicken dance! "

The license is meant to compensate for the heavy legal part of open source software. "We all want less lawyers in software, but that is not always possible," he says. "We may as well dress up the ugly legal side of it all with classic Swiss polka."

According to the submission, is based on BSD license. "I thought this was a good place to start for the CDL," he continues. "It is easy to understand and relatively short. Are my fourth clause and the disclaimer that I added relieve itself from the liability of injuries and costs incurred to run the chicken dance. "

The license is available here. Under article 4 of the license, anyone who wants to CDL deploy software without source code redistribution submission to the following conditions:

For every thousand (1,000) units divided, must at least half of the employees or persons working with the product to listen to the "Der Ententanz" (AKA "The Chicken Dance") composed by Thomas Werner for no less than two (2) minutesFor each twenty thousand (20,000) units-verdeeldtwee (2) or more persons are linked to the entity must be included to perform full chicken dance, in an original video on the entity's own costs, and a video encoded in OGG Theora format, at least three (3) minutes in length, must be presented to the , provided that the contact information. The dance must be based on the instructions on how to do the chicken dance with this software you have received. If you have instructions on how to do the chicken dance have not received, then the chicken dance-like in nature.Each employee or person associated with the product should be banned from the word "plinth" to say in public at all times, as long as distribution of the product.

It seems, but that the license is unlikely to win approval. "Clause 4 appears in conflict with OSD clause 5 because people with a disability or cultural obligations prevent them with both singing or dancing (or religious issues portraying chickens) not equal freedoms under the licence would have," writes OSI director Simon Phipps.

"It violates OSD clause 6 also if the use in the industry would prevent plinth. There are also difficulties relating to dependence on contact information up-to-date is such that freedoms would no longer is available in case uncontactable. "

No doubt, Google will oppose on the basis of the CDL license proliferation. And then Microsoft its own version, called the tolerant Chicken Dance license, which anyone who uses his code to run by the Swiss polka until they die of exhaustion will require will introduce. ®

Google gets serious about software patents-Network World

If nothing else, you need to have Google give props for his up-front about its strategy. The company announced that it would try to snap up Nortel patent porfolio at a bankruptcy auction. This Is a good thing?

Google is obviously the patent heat with Oracle to Dalvik complain about patents in Android related, and with its partners complain about patents to Android related Microsoft feeling. Not to mention the CPTN threat hanging over his head. The company is not exhibited a real interest in pursuing patent suits against competitors, and in favor of "patent reform" regarding software patents. Further, the company claims that it not only wants to protect themselves from patent suits but also "the open source community."

So, this is a good thing, right? Perhaps.

First, I'm not a huge fan of "patent reform" when it comes to patents on software. Patent "reform" usually means "Let's stack the deck in favor of us instead of someone else," instead of "software patents need to go, period. Maybe I'm just a crazy idealist, but I think that rather enjoys sufficient protection software thanks to trademark and copyright protections. It is true that the patent system is horribly broken, even if you think pure software should be patentable. But if you're going to push for something, Google should push to abolish software patents — not for "reform" that simply turn on a sandwich garnish some crap.

But if reform is the best thing we can do is, making a horrible system only less bad it is disheartening that Google seems to throw in the towel by the pursuit of the Nortel patents.

Google has one of the largest audience in the world. Imagine if Google some of his immense weight behind educating the public to vote on the ills of software patents. Google may cause severe pressure on congresscritters to enact reform (or withdrawn) of software patents.

In short, I believe that Google has decided that there was to be more serious about the patent arms race.

I can't love that decision, if it means a step back from to abolish software patents, but it is hard to argue against the logic of it.

The next question is: can the open source community trust Google here? Probably.

About the worst thing that you're about Google in relation to the open source Community can say is that the company does not do as much as it could. Google can do much more to cooperate with the Community when it comes to building game chrome, Chrome OS, Android, etc. Google Gets a lot of heat for "forking" the Linux kernel with its changes to Android, although this tends to be quite a bit exaggerated.

One of the worst crimes of Google is probably least noted: projects licensed under the Affero GPL on Google Code Hosting, it is not. The excuse here is that Google doesn't want to help license proliferation. The AGPL is the only licence to which Google to contribute changes to code that is used if this code in the traditional sense do not distribute. Do the math.

Generally though, is Google's open source track record is very good. It has a history of support of open source within and outside the company. The sponsors hundreds of students working on various projects of FOSS every summer with Summer of Code. Apart from its AGPL discrimination, Google Code Hosting is generally considered a good thing for FOSS projects.

So I doubt that Google are patent portfolio by the larger open source community would enable. However, without Google is more forthcoming about its intentions with the Nortel patents, it is difficult to say how useful will be, either.

One thing that Google could do to help the patent portfolio to the Open invention network (OIN). The Nortel portfolio, however, goes beyond the scope of the OIN. There's really not a body that is open source in General, just around Linux protects.

If Google knows to keep the Nortel patents from the hands of a company that is aggressively about patent suits, or away from a patent troll, then it will be a good thing. But it would be better if Google that casting were $ 900 million in lobbying to get rid of software patents altogether.

Open source vs proprietary software-Computing

The inclusion of open source software within companies has increased considerably in the past 10 years, almost to the point, analysts say, where there are more organizations are now using some form of open source tool than not.

But it is important to remember that not all open source software is the same-quality, cost and support resources significantly from one application or operating system-factors that ultimately determine differences will or a company a positive or negative experience of technology.

Peter Dawes-Huish is chief executive of LinuxIT, a Bristol based Linux technology and services company that advises the about Linux adoption to businesses of all sizes, as well as local councils and Central Government organisations. The company has just her best ever trade year since its founding in 1999, with revenues in 2010 up to 50 percent more than the previous year.

"People pooling open source software in a bucket-there are good open source products and not so well open source products," he says. "There are a number of evangelist organisations about open source is the answer to everything talk will, when it is of course not. Just like any other software should it carefully and correctly selected for use. "

Research Analyst Gartner surveyed 547 IT professionals in organizations from 11 countries in July and August 2010, and found that more than half had already open source software. Of these, 22% open source software in all departments had deployed, but a much higher number of-46% – had used open source tools for specific tasks or application projects, stating that many are happier for dipping their toe in the water of the open source, at least initially, either instead of throwing it broadly. A further 21 percent said they were evaluating whether or not to open source applications suitable for use in their organization.

"There is a very strong propaganda blogger focus among the open source community that tends to treat open source as an ideology," said Mark Driver, Research Vice-President at Gartner. "Even some organizations treat it as an ethical issue and that tends to blur."

Why use open source?
It is clear that there seems to be sufficient demand for commercially supported open source software delivery models that a viable alternative to proprietary applications in a variety of business cases. And the benefit usually associated with open source-lower costs for licenses and support – is not always what the IT department or strive to achieve, or realistic.

Driver says open source software can often make the "illusion" of cost savings, but in most cases bring a broader range of options and more freedom. The benefits of its adoption, he says, three different categories: cost, optimization and flexibility.

"There is a universal assumption of cost savings for open source but we felt that varies dramatically," he says.

"That's not to say that people do not save money, just that it's not automatic. A large number of people that we are considering why they ask a transition toward open source say cost savings at first. However, when we crunch the numbers – not just the total cost of ownership, which is almost zero, but also the costs for maintenance and support, plus the risk of cutting a certain vendor – only 50% end up actually money besparenterwijl most of the rest break even, and the rest spend even more in comparison with proprietary software. "

LinuxIT the Dawes-Huish agrees there are different, often conflicting arguments around total cost of ownership and return on investment for open source software platforms.

Rabu, 06 April 2011

Lawyer hits out at Google's open source efforts-TechEye

A Professor has hit out at the way Google is controlling the Android product say that the outfit is one of the classic mistakes of those who try to controls on open source.

Eben Moglen, a professor of law at Columbia Law School and the Director of the Software Freedom Law Center, said that Google just the mistakes of the past of other companies that tried to repeat is strict control around the release of their open-source software.


Talk with Business Week, said Moglen companies that experience teaches that expose the code to the community more than it hurts you helps.


He thinks that Google does not, however, the memo about that one. It has device makers of his change in plans with the honeycomb incarnation of Android.


It seems likely that Google will probably wait to make another open source distribution of Android software until the next version called ice is completed.


Android is based on Linux, but Google sticks in many of his own code. But Google has been criticized for making improvements to its products to the needs, but don't put a lot of changes over to the broader open source community.


When it's done, it has received praise for her efforts. The framework for a new kind of data analytical system, called Hadoop, has wide adoption by large Web companies and the traditional companies.

Awards Highlight Impact of Open source software-PCWorld

It's hard to beat stellar earnings as evidence of the business value of a technology, and Red Hat provided for Linux with its fourth quarter report last week. Further fuel to add to the festive open source burning the past his days, however, several batches of awards recognize the broad impact of various free Software projects and contributors.


Internet freedom for Egyptians


Last Tuesday, for example, the Free Software Foundation announced the winners of its two awards for 2010. The first of which--called the Award for projects of social benefit--gets each year to a project "that intentionally and significantly benefits society through collaboration an important social task, to complete" in the FSF's own words.


This year, did that price to the Tor Project, a free software project that has enabled some 36 million people around the world to their freedom and anonymity on the Internet to maintain. The Tor Project has proven central in dissident movements in Iran and Egypt, says the FSF.


Previous winners of the Award for projects of social utility have been the Internet Archive, Creative Commons, Groklaw and Wikipedia.


The Award for the Advancement of Free Software is the other award that the FSF each year, and it's going to be an individual who contributed a great deal to the progress and development of free software. This year, the award went to Rob Savoye, founder and CTO of Media is now open and a long time hacker who on GNU and other free software has worked for more than 20 years.


Savoy has contributed to dozens of projects including GCC, GDB, DejaGnu, Newlib, Libgloss, Cygwin, eCos, expect, several major GNU/Linux distributions and one Laptop Per Child. He has also the efforts for the production of the free software Flash player called Gnash.


' Swiss Army Knife of the 21st century '


Across the Atlantic, meanwhile, took the open source Apache Hadoop project the main prize at this year's MediaGuardian Innovation Awards, which were handed out in London last Thursday.


Of the project open source software is designed to help companies such as Facebook and Twitter handle large amounts of data. As such, it was described by the jury as a "Swiss army knife of the 21st century," with the potential to "change the face of media innovations."


Apache Hadoop has the potential to become a catalyst for innovation, in fact, higher than that of other nominees and WikiLeaks the iPad, according to the jury.


Top linux Gurus ' 2011 '


Last, but definitely not least, the Linux Foundation on Monday announced the Top five 2011 Linux.com Linux Gurus, or the most active members of Linux.com in the past year. Linux gurus are chosen on the basis of the points they accumulate by contributing in many ways on the site, including community blogs and message board postings, comments on articles, blogs and boards, and answers to questions from the community.


Linux.com of Ultimate Linux Guru is now Matthew Fillpot, a development and training specialist at an international travel company which since the beginning of 2009 a Linux.com moderator. If the Ultimate Linux Guru, Matthew will receive a fully loaded "Dream Linux Machine."


Aaron Aceves, Andrea Benini, Shane Hatcher and Istimsak are the other four Abdulbasir Linux Gurus for this year. All five will receive invitations to attend the Summit this year the Linux Foundation Collaboration, where they meet the annual Linux.com Planning meeting will participate. They will also receive digital guru badges to help market their skills to potential employers and their status among colleagues.


Job search skills to Linux, 47% year over year, the Linux Foundation site notes, citing Dice.com jobs. You can see the Top 50 Linux Gurus exhibited in a special section on Linux.com.


There can be no doubt left that free and open source software is a key factor for business--and the world? I don't think so. Is it not time that your company of everything which benefited has to offer?

Comment: Open source can also be highly secure-InfoSecurity Magazine

The British Government recently that purpose of open-source software is good for driving cost savings, particularly in the light of the austerity measures. Open-source products, but often must be enriched with ' secret sauce ' (i.e., proprietary software components) in order to make them fit for purpose and to the strict CESG approval processes.

Use of open-source software for the basis of a technology stack is obviously a cost-effective approach to take because the software is free and there are some licensing issues. Nevertheless, the caveat has always been the security problems. The prevailing view within the IT industry has been that proprietary need safer and therefore better-this is not always the case.

In combination with layers of specialized software, which is the value add of the vendor, open-source systems can provide very robust applications that are not only profitable, but very suitable. Because of their open character, these systems are highly portable, scalable and interoperable. These attributes further investment, making these systems a very real option for industry and commercial enterprises, as well as to protect the Government.

It has been reported recently that open source "effectively banned" of Government IT because the approval of CESG, the information assurance arm of SOCIETE GENERALE. Pure open-source products would indeed struggling to satisfy CESG approval; However, take a blended approach, technology products can achieve CESG approval. Becrypt is this evidence.

If the Government drive cost-cutting measures in the coming years, more and more of the IT vendor community will move to providing solutions based on open-source technology, simply because the forces of the market will require.

However, it will never be as straightforward as organizations just download open-source products and staff open season to choose what they want. While open source on the server, with Apache Web Server is one of the most popular and included in many other branded servers (such as IBM Websphere) has embraced, there are still problems with the adoption on the desktop.

Open-source products in General should be toughened to make them fit for purpose, particularly in the vicinity of a Government, and at this time, there is confusion about who is the owner of that risk. ICT good practices are to be followed, and open-source products need to be selected by the same amount of due diligence as when a new IT product. Good engineering practices are still necessary when suppliers producing new products based on open source, and mixing of the open source with its own ' secret sauce ' will still be highly skilled and experienced developers require.

The IT industry is cyclical, like any other. IBM built in 1981 the first business PCs, but expected to be forever mainframes and Microsoft sales, supported the hobbyists and home users. Now, thirty years later, we are once again ready for change as people away from the desktop to the cloud. In computer terms, this is the old mainframe model jazzed up for modern times.

As organisations – including the Government – to the model of cloud, and people to get used to new ways of working, we'll start to see a change to the desktop. People will no longer insist on Microsoft Office, scared to try other products in the event their Word documents will not work. Will people are glad to offer an open-source word processing application to use, and compatibility with other products will be the norm, much as in the early days of the PC when there are other products, such as Lotus 123 and WordPerfect. Currently, safety is often given as an excuse not to use open source, but this fear evaporated with blended technology that is fully approved.

While it clearly will take many years before big companies their ERP systems on open-source turns his-based systems, the trend towards cheaper software is definitely here-we see this in the huge spread of extremely cheap apps and games available for the iPhone, iPad, and Android devices. It will start with the Government and SMEs looking for more cost-effective ways of working, with the more agile vendors stepping in to plug this hole in the market. The next phase will departments of large businesses looking for ways to distinguish themselves for individual projects or products/services.

Eventually we will see a move away from expensive license-based own ICT systems, on a much more open, interoperable and cost-effective way of working.

Marc Hocking is chief technology officer at Becrypt. Prior to joining Becrypt, Hocking was with the UK Government Cabinet Office where he worked closely with large divisions solutions worked in support of the delivery of a number of cross-government to develop projects. He spent 10 years in a number of different roles within the international financial institutions, to work on systems that PKI, authentication, authorization, and infrastructure for the privilege.

Open source for iPhone Apps-automated testing Network World

If you ever have been involved in any Software development you know that testing your code can sometimes take longer than actually writing. If you have an automated testing tool you can afford, you can really cut down the time. In the traditional computer world there is a healthy ecosystem of tools that are available for the testing of applications, some automated, some not.


Today there is no market hotter than app development for smartphones.  With literally hundreds of thousands of apps available for the iOS that runs on the iPhone and iPad, was an automated testing solution desperately needed.  In this violation stepped a Boulder, Co based company called Gorilla Logic and their open source FoneMonkey tool. With the slogan that a Gorilla beats 10 monkeys, Gorilla Logic has helped some of the biggest companies in the world to develop great software. What is great about their mobile tools is that it's free, open source software that brings state-of-the-art automated software testing for everyone.


I had a chance to sit with Ed Schwarz, co-founder and VP Engineering of Gorilla Logic to talk about the company and the latest version of FoneMonkey that they just announced. This latest version has some important new features, including:

Robust script recording and playback – more extensive recording and playback for user interactions, including cranes, keyboard input, drag and scrolling for all cocoa Touch components.Code generation options-FoneMonkey can now ready-to-run test scripts generate in Objective-C that can be run under OCUnit, or JavaScript that can be done with Apple's UI Automation tools.Optimized for both the iPhone and iPad platforms and user interfaces.FoneMonkey now works both simulators and real devices.Test playbacks can be completely automated.

Schwarz says that the company makes money by offering services and support for the open source FoneMonkey tool. But the folks at Gorilla Logic actually FoneMonkey for their own development projects developed. When she saw that FoneMonkey so valuable they decided to offer for everyone to fill this gap in the ecosystem of the development for mobile development.


Gorilla Logic has developed software for over 10 years. The founding team formed composed of ex-Sun engineers at the heart of Suns Java professional services team. With Java such a popular choice for mobile development is Gorilla Logic is in high demand.  Gives the community the tool has helped them establish FoneMonkey as a leader in the mobile development scene.


In the meantime, all mobile developers take advantage of the benefits of an automated testing tool.  Sounds like a win-win for me. In addition to FoneMonkey for iPhone and iPad has Gorilla Logic also open source tools for the Adobe Flex platform testing. As the company focused on other mobile platforms develops, you can probably expect more open source apps testing Gorilla Logic away to see.


Part of the hot Boulder tech scene, Gorilla Logic is not venture backed. It took them 10 years to get where they are now, but looking back that they otherwise would not have taken! In the meantime, will hopefully we all see better quality apps delivered because FoneMonkey is available as a free and open source tool for anyone to use.


 

Red Hat shares jump on the strong profit-abc27

SAN JOSE, California (AP)-Red Hat Inc. shares jumped more than 10 percent Wednesday after the software is December-February results came in stronger than expected, helped by companies zeal to adopt "cloud computing" technologies.

Net income in Red Hat's fiscal fourth quarter, which ended February 28, rose by 43 percent. Red Hat earned $ 33.5 million, or 17 cents per share, versus $ 23.4 million, or 12 cents per share, in the previous year.

Excluding items, profit was 26 cents per share, for the 22 cents per share that analysts polled by FactSet expected.

Turnover rose by 25 percent to 244.8 million dollars, topping forecasts for $ 235.9 million.

"Cloud computing" refers to services that will be streamed via the Internet, instead of requiring software directly on a desktop or laptop computer. Jim Whitehurst, Red Hat's CEO, said the company is on track to reach 1 billion dollars in revenue in the fiscal year, helped by that trend.

For all of Red Hat's most recent fiscal year net income jumped from the company's 23 percent to $ 107.3 million, while turnover rose by 22 percent to 909.3 million dollars. Analysts expect Red Hat hit 1.03 billion dollars in the current fiscal year.

"We believe that the strong demand we experience was largely driven by customers that their data centers to modernise and prepare their infrastructure for cloud computing," Whitehurst said in a statement.

Information technology spending is on the rise as companies spend more freely after clamping down during the great recession. But Japanese earthquake and tsunami raised fears about companies like Red Hat that a large amount of business in that country. Regulatory filings, has Red Hat Japan described as the only country, besides the United States, that is individually material to the results. Red Hat makes still, most of the money from u.s. customers.

Red Hat is specialized in "open source" software, which technically is free because the source code is freely distributed on the Internet, but what companies like Red Hat are able to benefit from the sale of licenses that include support services.

Despite fears about Japan rebounded Red Hat's stock, which is already in the past month had dropped sharply Wednesday on the higher-than-expected results.

$ 4.03 Rose shares up $ 44 in extended trading, after the results were reported. She was rose 41 cents, or 1 percent, to $ 39.97 at the end of the regular session.

Copyright 2011 the Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Selasa, 05 April 2011

Apple purges Open Apple sauce of OSX server TechEye

 

Steve Jobs ' Apple Inc. is ending her relationship with an Open Source product key through all aspects of Samba software of the upcoming release of Mac OS X 10.7 Lion Remove Server


We would not have thought that a control-freak like job would have a lot of love to the free-wheeling, Open Source movement, but Apple began bundling Samba with Mac OS X 10.2 to help Mac users to connect with Microsoft's Windows file and network directory services.


Samba, however, is moved to the GPL 3 license which is a little stricter and makes it a bit too free for Jobs flavors. He has decided to open source the previously bundled Samba software remove and replace it with Apple's own tools for Windows file sharing and directory services.


Developers have told Appleinsider that jobs Mob internally has officially announced that it will be Samba of Mac OS X Server lion and Lion, and replaced by Windows networking software developed by Apple.


It will be called SMBX, and supports the newer Microsoft SMB2 version of her own but openly published protocol, which was released in Windows Vista.


While this sounds horrible, it is better than what was used before jobs crowd. Samba only supported the original SMB1 and SBM2 is both faster and more efficiently.


The new regime will have access to both Macs and Windows-style file shares allow. However, it will not support the NT Domain Controller functions of Samba. These were a fairly strange quirk anyway if they relate to Microsoft the 1990 's, have NT-era directory service supported prior to Active Directory.


Some network managers want still use NT Domain Controller configurations because it is a no brainer in comparison with Active Directory. Jobs Mob is, however, to do the right thing here and telling them to pull finger and move into the 21st century.


Getting rid of Samba also means that the Macs actually better able to work around modern Pcs running Windows 7. Windows 7 had some security changes in how encryption protocols works which were impossible under Samba.

Decision of the criteria for open source and proprietary software-Computing

The selection of operating systems was once one of the most important decisions IT managers had to face when considering their options for service delivery, be it for servers or desktops. Until a decade ago, such choices were limited to choose from a range of proprietary operating systems supplied by vendors. But the past 10 years have witnessed a new option to take into account in the form of open source operating systems. What drives the selection process, the choice between open source software and operating systems supplied by a vendor?

When considering or open source operating systems software or by a commercial ISV be provided, the influence that the decision-making process, in essence, the same as they always are. Some characteristics of eight or nine are the most important items are eligible, including licensing models and costs, application support, availability of skills, operational support options, performance requirements and risk analysis. Of these, the three or four tend to dominate the selection processes. When watching PC solutions it is also important to remember that the user experience of the solutions and their comfort can be large selection factors.

On top of the selection when choosing between operating systems is a factor that absolute importance. The application works on the OS or someone should port it over to a new platform? After all, nobody runs an operating system because they want to run the OS for its own sake. It's there to anchor an application, database, or another service and make it available to users.

When open source operating systems first came to the forefront, some commercial applications were supported on the architectures available, thereby severely limited number of choices. Today, this is changed, with many commercial Isvs now more than happy to use their software on the leading open source platforms, often next to Windows, Unix or other of the major server operating systems supported. Unless the application does not support a specific OS, this factor alone may not be a large selection of bifurcation point between an open source and commercial operating system.

If the pending compatible with both open source and proprietary operating systems, other factors come into play. Among these are the business of licensing model and costs. For commercial Isvs everyone understands that there are to pay license fees, possibly with associated support and maintenance/software upgrade costs for administrative processing.

The same cannot be said of open source operating systems, where in some minds the perception exists that "open source" equates to "free". In fact, many of the major distributors of open source software in General, and of operating systems in particular struggling to explain the conditions for the use of the solutions which they put at its disposal of its customers. The confusion is particularly acute as Linux distributors, such as RedHat and SuSE, the basic software for no cost but support subscription services to help organizations keep the operating system to function and offer assistance if problems are encountered.

Given the fact that open source software, by its nature, readily available for inspection and modification (from the perspective of a source coder), with active communities work to develop, improve and troubleshoot problems when they occur, it is theoretically possible for information workers within the enterprise problems that they are without paid services of the supplier.

But few organizations have the skilled staff available internally, solving problems, not in the least to do within the very short time frames on which service problems should be solved now routinely, let alone with the possibilities to test them. In addition, support and maintenance of software platform per se is widely regarded as a distraction in a mainstream IT environments where all resources are stretched.

This is where the vendors of open source operating systems provide support contracts. In truth, would be just from the viewpoint of risk little organizations consider using software to deliver mainstream business services without any form of external aid instead, contract unless they are extremely confident in their own possibilities to solve his, fast, problems. And here's the rub, because once you sign up for such a contract for open source software, often you find yourself as limited as you with commercial solutions. In some cases, for example, you may be required to pay a subscription for all instances of the software used in your organization, or you support for them or don't want.

As with commercial operating systems, the contracts for open source operating systems should therefore be read with care and diligence, supported as possible by engaging professional advice to ensure that the conditions and arrangements for support and business use. The subject of the license fees, to distinguish between open source and commercial software may not be as easy as it can be assumed.

On the issue of "costs", it must also be acknowledged that, while the cost of acquisition and support, when all the terms and conditions are understood, can easily calculate, over the lifetime of such systems, it is likely that it will be the management overheads that the majority of the total cost of ownership. It is therefore important to understand how good governance of the Organization and management tools of the operating systems under consideration. While many management frameworks are now able to integrate – should at least to some degree – with open source operating systems, the exact possibilities be examined to ensure that additional costs for the acquisition of Administration facilities not unexpected.

Of even greater importance is to ensure that the skills the IT management team has the needs of the chosen platform available match, and/or a cross-training or recruitment requirements into account. In many organizations, the familiarity with open source software, especially Linux, is now achieving the same level that the longer established commercial operating systems, but this is not the case everywhere, especially in smaller organizations. Skills to advanced features such as fault tolerance, clustering must also not be forgotten, where relevant.
Tony Lock is Program Director at Freeform Dynamics

EU talks with Microsoft called a contradiction-New York Times

BERLIN — the European Commission, which is to insist on the Continent to consider using open-source software compatible to make their computer systems more Governments, is negotiating with Microsoft to extend the use of the own Windows operating system on 36,000 government computers, a spokesman said Monday.

Antony Gravili, a spokesman for Maros Sefcovic, Commissioner responsible for Government, said that the agreement covers 42 agencies and institutions that comprise the bulk of Europe's Central Government.

"By negotiating a large order which we hope to drive down prices," said Mr. Gravili.

Of the Commission four years, € 49.8 million or $ 70.7 million agreement to buy Windows licenses through a Microsoft vendor, Fujitsu Siemens Computers, expires on 31 May. The Commission is using a procurement method called a "negotiated procedure" to expand the license agreement for up to three years without the contract and make a public bid to extinguish.

"The Commission asks Member States to move towards open standards and interoperability, but the Commission itself does, of course, nothing of the sort," says Karsten Gerloff, President of the Free Software Foundation Europe, a group advocating for open-source software. "The public message is that we want you to innovate and improve your IT systems. The subtext is that we don't want to do this yourself. "

The debate is typical of the high-stakes commercial competition about how software is sold, which until now largely by companies like Microsoft, the dominant seller of operating systems, by means of direct licensing agreements is defined.

Microsoft's share of the global operating system market, estimated at more than 90 percent, according to Gartner, encourages companies and Governments to use software to their own systems remain compatible. But increasingly, many companies and some Governments, such as the city of Munich, open-source software, which is given away without license fees in exchange for installation and maintenance contracts.

Mr Gravili, the Commission's spokesman, said there was no contradiction between the extension of the use of Windows and the European interoperability framework, the policy recommendation the Commission has adopted last year that encourages the Governments on the Continent to use open source software, if applicable.

"The Commission is one of the largest users of open-source software in the world," said Mr. Gravili. He said that the Commission makes use of more than 250 different types of open-source software from companies like Red Hat, Atlassian and Balsamiq Studios. Daily activities in Brussels run on more than 350 servers using the Linux open-source operating system. European Union-websites use 850 servers with open-source software.

In 2005, the European Commission considered, but decided against the Government, from computing infrastructure to convert to open-source software, saying the charges were priceless.

Mr. Gerloff, which is headquartered in Aachen, Germany, the question of whether the Commission's decision to expand the Windows licenses was based on "software lock-in," a situation where large customers, as the Commission, often are forced to keep buying the same software to avoid the additional costs and the work of the switch to a different system.

Such decisions can generate short-term savings but increases in the dependency of one large buyers of vendors as Microsoft, that can only determine the price.

"By the only extension the relationship with Microsoft, the Commission, the cost grows from the transition to an open system in the future," said Mr. Gerloff.

Jesse Verstraete, a spokesman for Microsoft in Brussels, declined to comment.

Neelie Kroes, European Commissioner responsible for the digital agenda, which the benefits of open-source software alternatives has adopted, and that as former Commissioner for competition completed a 10-year European antitrust prosecution of Microsoft, also declined to comment, said Jonathan Todd, a spokesman.

Graham Taylor, the chief executive of Open forum Europe, a Brussels-group whose members Microsoft competitors Google, International Business Machines, Oracle and Red Hat include, questioning the decision to expand Windows without a public bidding process.

"This decision seems to contradict the policy objectives IT recorded in digital agenda of the Commission and also, it seems at odds with the Commission's efforts to ensure that tendering procedures in Europe more transparent and fairer," said Mr. Taylor said.

In addition to the symbolic adoption of Microsoft products, will the Commission's decision on operating system licenses also probably lead to a comprehensive upgrade of the computers of the Commission, which on Windows XP, Windows 7, the latest version of the operating system running. Mr Gravili, the Commission's spokesman, said the decision about whether to upgrade to Windows 7 in treatment and was not related to the current negotiations.

Senin, 04 April 2011

Software users get to choose the best of both worlds-GulfNews

Dubai: don't believe everything you read about tech camps siding only with both proprietary software (PS) or open source software (OSS), says Harvard Business School professor.

Dr. Josh Lerner, co-author of a new book, Comingled Code, said on a scale of growing companies, Governments and educational institutions are both forms of private mix and free public software to their needs, nixing the idea that there is one winner takes everything in the software industry.

Lerner, who co-authored the book with Mark Schankerman, said: "standard dichotomy between PS and OSS is exaggerated and misleading", and that both forms are increasingly being used in an evolving society to get the job done.

"While they are different, each has strengths and weaknesses, but it's not like it's oil and vinegar that they are diametrically opposed," said Lerner.

"We have a research done in 15 countries of 2000 software developers and 2000 users consisting of non-profit, Governments and businesses. We found that there was a very striking overlap on the user and producer side. "

After the survey data crunching, Lerner said one of the things that stood out was "co-mingling was going on here."

The big reason for mixing, he said, is that very often proprietary software that is greatly limited by big corporate giants such as Microsoft does not cover all of the user, who then free open source software can use to fill in the gaps.

Increased market share

Users are much more pragmatic about these days for all their bases, then stick to only one form of licensed software, he said.

Open source software is enjoying more of a market share as known versions of free software such as Mozilla Firefox Web browser against license private Web browsers, such as Windows Explorer compete.

Another good example of a growing open source presence is the Android operating system on mobile phones compared to the heavily limited proprietary versions used by Apple on the iPhone or Blackberry phones by Research in Motion.

A study conducted in 2008 by the Standish Group, for example, showed even then that open source software was making serious inroads as free software for all to enjoy and in relation to the proprietary software sold by computer software giant.

At the time of the release companies the Standish Group Chairman Jim Johnson said open source software cost proprietary software large bundles of cash. "It's the ultimate in disruptive technology, and although it is only 6% of [a] estimated 1 trillion that the budgeted annually, constitutes a real loss of 60 billion dollars [Dh220.34 billion] in annual revenues to software companies," Johnson said.

Open source software was started in 1984 by the Free Software Foundation's general public license system where anyone can perform free open source software, and make changes in the redistribution of copies for wide public use renewed, as long as there are no restrictions on user launched.

In Lerner's recent survey of countries around the world he learned that there is a "tremendous growth in open source activity in time" has been.

National trends

Statistical figures from the survey results suggested that 26.8% of the respondents were using both proprietary and open source software, while 67.3 percent average said they only proprietary software used and 5.9 percent said that they only open source exclusively used.

Turkey scored highest in the survey of mixed-use category with 43.9 percent of respondents say they use both forms, while Singapore respondents lowest scored for mixed use with only 10 percent say that they are both used.

Not surprising then that Singapore respondents the highest users (87.7 percent) of proprietary software only.

The country that the highest rate of open source report only was Brazil with 12.9 percent.

At the end of the day said Lerner that anyone involved in the world of high-stakes international computing must accept that both forms of private and free public open source software here to stay ... together.

He compared the existence of both animals that live in a forest. "Just as singers and falcons in the eco-system, there is both co-habitation and competition between OSS and PS," Lerner said. "We need policies that both live together and to facilitate competition."

Minggu, 03 April 2011

NASA invites Media to Open source Summit 29-30 March In California-space Ref (press release)

WASHINGTON--Journalists are invited to attend NASA's first open source software development Summit 29-30 March, the Agency's Ames Research Center in Moffett field, California. The event runs from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. PDT on both days.

The event brings together engineers, policy makers and members of the open source community. They will discuss challenges within the existing policy framework of open source and changes to NASA's development, introduction and use of software.


Tsengdar Lee, of the agency acting chief technology officer for information technology, Nicholas Skytland, Director of NASA's Open Government initiative, and the other participants will be available for interviews from noon to 1 pm on both days.


To register for the event, reporters should contact Cristina LeClerc at 650-604-2303 or cristina.k.leclerc@nasa.gov by 4 p.m. on Monday, 28 March. All other questions and interview requests should be directed to Jessica Culler at 650-604-4789 or jessica.culler@nasa.gov.


For information about the Summit, including speaker biographies and the agenda, visit: http://www.nasa.gov/open/source


For more information about Ames, visit: http://www.nasa.gov/ames

Sabtu, 02 April 2011

Say adios to Samba in OS X-CNET (blog)

When it comes to networking with Windows systems, since OS X 10.2 "Jaguar", Apple has relied on the open source "Samba" suite, which can be enabled in parts of OS X system preferences for both file sharing and interacting with directory services of NT domains. Although there are some proprietary Windows file-sharing solutions for OS X, is Apple's implementation of Samba welcome the package of open-source nature; However, sooner or later all things must come to an end.

The Samba team recently the licenses for the software for the GPLv3 license, which adds a number of restrictions for the software that Apple has decided will not work for it. Probably a function of the GPLv3 crackdown on "Tivoization," that's where a company contains of free software in commercial products but it be modified by the user are limited (or at least it implements in such a way that tampering would result in the product is not working properly).


Result of these new restrictions, Apple will not be including Samba in future versions of OS X, although Samba probably as an option to continue will download, compile, and install in OS X for those who wish to use it.


Despite the lack of Samba, Apple's systems will still continue to work with Windows networks right out of the box. According to Appleinsider, Apple is apparently to tackle the problem by building its own services for Windows-based networks, which will be included in the Server and Client versions of the OS X lion.


These users probably expect changes can be the end of support for NT domains in OS X, though even Microsoft has moved on from this technology in Windows 7. Besides, Apple delivered a solution can also mean more-compliant networking between Windows and OS X, since Apple will be able to better adjust its networking solutions in OS X.


Like Apple's strategy has been in the past, we expect Apple with a relatively boring and basic performance of its network solution, over time work in more features will start as they mature. There may be a few setbacks in the first instance, but on the whole, the similar functionality to what Samba can do at this time.


Only time will tell what the exact changes will be for the end user, and more details can occur if Lion matures, but be sure that it is highly unlikely that Apple will drop support for Windows networking altogether.


Please note, however, that together with Apple's use of Samba is influenced by the new licenses, there may be other software which ultimately also a similar fate could suffer. Apple currently contains a number of open source packages such as X 11 next to Samba, ruby, python, and several command-line tools that can all be upgraded to or license GLPv3 implement and also be affected.



Questions? Comments? Have a fix? Post them below or send an email!
Care to check us out on Twitter and the CNET Mac forums.

Sabtu, 26 Maret 2011

Most mobile phone Apps violate Open Source rules-PCWorld

Seven of the 10 Android and iOS apps that open source "fails to meet basic open source license requirements," according to a new analysis.


Open Logic, allowing open source software support, scan and governance tools, said that the analyzed 635 mobile applications for Android, iPhone and iPad, including 66 open source software under the Apache, GPL or LGPL license. The vendor found that 71% of the 66 apps violated important commitments by the open source licenses required.


Although the revision only 66 open source apps, there are many more such programs running on Android, iPhone and iPad, or at least in the works. Black Duck Software recently examined 3800 free and open source mobile projects started in 2010, and found that 55% on Android and 39% to Apple's iOS.


Small print: introduction to the Open source software licensing


Meet open source requirements seems to be a sore spot for mobile developers, as the Open Logic survey is any indication.


"Many mobile and tablet developers may not have a complete picture of the open source they use and the requirements of the open source licenses," Kim Weins, Senior Vice President of products and marketing at Open Logic, said in the announcement of the survey. "This has real-world consequences. For example, has the Free Software Foundation stated that the GPL and iTunes licenses are not compatible, and Apple has already several apps from the store who were determined to be under the GPL. Google has also takedown requests received for Android market apps that violated the GPL. App developers should pay attention to the open source license compliance to ensure that their apps are not affected by legal actions. "


The Android operating system itself is open source, using the Apache licence, as well as the GPL for Linux components. But Google has been sued by Oracle, which claims Java Android infringes on patents and copyrights. Apple's iOS is proprietary.


Open the scan Logic of Android and iOS apps found that most of the open source ones violate GPL requirements such as the provision of source code or an offer to the source code or the requirement for a copy of the license; most mobile apps using the Apache licence violated requirements to get a copy of the licenses or the notices and their powers.


Scrap were on Android and iOS similar. The Android apps compliance rate was 27% and iOS was on 32%.


Open Logic also said that two Android applications contained LGPL version 2.1, a license that "might have potential conflicts with Apache 2.0, the big license of the Android operating system."


Further, Open Logic said it was "found several apps with extensive end-user license agreements that all software included claimed was under their copyright and ownership of them-when in fact a part of the code in the app open source."


Open Logic has not identified a specific apps, but said her selection focused "top paid and free apps for Android, iPhone and the iPad on a variety of categories," including "apps out of the top 20 companies in the Fortune 500." Categories included "banking applications, sport and game applications, applications of the world's most recognized brands and media organizations and popular applications of smaller companies."


Jon Brodkin follow on Twitter: www.twitter.com/jbrodkin

Jumat, 25 Maret 2011

NASA-top to host open-source-GCN.com

Forum will challenges in Office, open-source community

NASA will be hosting an open-source software Summit in the Ames Research Center in Moffett field, California, at the end of the month to the leaders in the open-source community together to focus on the challenges facing the community and to processes, policy and culture necessary open-source development.

The top, which take place March 29-30, will have a variety of speakers from the open-source community, including Director of Mozilla Labs (the company behind the Firefox browser) Pascal Finetti; Dr. Robert Sutor, vice president of open systems and Linux at IBM; and Brian Steven, a chief technology officer and vice president of engineering at Red Hat, among others.

"Open source brings numerous benefits NASA software projects, including increased quality, reduced costs, faster development cycles and fewer barriers to public-private cooperation Agency for the commercialization of technology," said Chris Kemp, chief technology officer for it at NASA, in a press release.

According to the release include targets for the top; establishing a method to support cooperation with the public about the development life cycle; Exploring NASA's ability to release and develop software under a variety of open-source license; to determine whether and to what extent NASA to the open-source software governance bodies can participate; and collect best practices from the private sector and other federal agencies.

The Summit will be facilitated by Wayne Moses Burke and Lucas Cioffi of the Open Forum Foundation. Forum participants will break down in focus groups and policy solutions to challenges such as the open-source license, governance, risk assessment and the International Traffic in Arms Regulations to discuss.

About the author

Than Rowinski is a staff reporter for communication technologies.

Rabu, 23 Maret 2011

NASA to Host Open Source Summit March In California-Imperial Valley News

Washington, DC-NASA will host a Summit on open source Software Development on 29-30 March on the Agency's Ames Research Center in Moffett field, California. The event runs from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. PDT on both days.

NASA's first Open Source Summit will bring together engineers, policy makers and members of the open source community. Participants will discuss the challenges within the existing policy framework of open source and propose changes to facilitate of NASA's development, introduction and use of software.

"Open source brings numerous benefits NASA software projects, including improved quality, reduced development costs, faster development cycles and fewer barriers to public-private cooperation Agency for the commercialization of technology," said NASA's Chief Technology Officer for information technology Chris c. Kemp. "The full benefits of open source can only be achieved if NASA is able to processes, policies and culture needed to encourage and support open source development."

Objectives for the Summit, establishing a method to support cooperation with the public during the development life cycle; Exploring NASA's ability to release and develop software under open source licenses varied; to determine whether and to what extent NASA to the open source software governance bodies can participate; and collect best practices from the private sector and other federal agencies.

Guest speakers will provide insight into the best practices and valuable lessons learned in the construction and the use of open source communities share. Confirmed speakers include Kemp; Pascal Finetti, Director of Mozilla Labs; Robert Sutor, vice president of Open systems at IBM; Chris Wanstrath, CEO and co-founder of Github; and Brian Stevens, CTO and vice president of Worldwide Engineering at Red Hat.

The Summit will include sessions on licensing, government restrictions, such as the International Traffic in Arms Regulations, governance, and risk assessments.

Seats at the event is limited. However, virtual participation is open to the public through online media, including live video streaming, electronic discussion and joint to take note. For more information or to register for the Summit, visit:

http://www.NASA.gov/open/source/