Open Source Advocacy The Right Way 364
[vmlinuz] writes "With a rapid succession of people moving towards Open Source, advocacy and evangelism is increasingly important in helping organizations to move over. The O'Reilly Network has begun publishing a series of articles about Open Source by Jono Bacon that teaches how to approach advocacy sensibly and more productively." From the article: "Although Aristotle developed his message many, many years ago, the concept of optimizing how we talk to people has developed further throughout history. From Aristotle to Heraclitus to Friedrich Nietzsche to Helen Keller to George Bernard Shaw, many people have advocated new thinking in times of rabid opposition."
You mean... (Score:5, Funny)
What about yelling First Post????
Re:You mean... (Score:5, Funny)
Oh yeah, IRONIC.
Re:You mean... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:You mean... (Score:2, Insightful)
But Microsoft *IS* evil, aren't they?
The problem is, that isn't enough. Most people don't want to hear why they shouldn't use (insert product), they want to hear whey they *should* use (insert alternate product)...especially when the first product (in this case Microsoft software...or commercial software in general) has, for better or worse, become the standard.
Re:You mean... (Score:5, Insightful)
If, OTOH, you consider any action that makes money good, our ethical notions differ too much for meaningful discussion.
Re:You mean... (Score:5, Insightful)
If you don't want to be associated with the rabid fans of OSS then don't associate with them. I've found that the people outside of the community don't know about the rabid fanaticism of some OSS zealots. Their only exposure to OSS is via news channels such as Business Week and CNN. They see companies like IBM and Novell putting their weight behind open source software and their curiosity is piqued. Since these people know I use Linux they come to me to ask questions and it's then my responsibility to discuss their concerns and clear up misconceptions.
In my personal experience the nut-cases are few and far between. Slashdot and usenet are about the only places that I see people foaming at the mouth about how bad Microsoft is. There are other forums where I read about how people don't like Microsoft, but those people can clearly articulate why they feel that Microsoft solutions aren't the right way to go for them. I meet plenty of people in other online forums, users groups, and computer stores who can see the benefits of OSS for what they are without being distracted by a handful of vocal teenagers.
Re:This is the same reason why Macs are so rare (Score:3, Insightful)
If I am at a meeting, and a few projects are being presented, the typically come in three flavors:
1 - This project may not be exciting, but it is based on technology that is popular (Microsoft), and we haven't been burned by this yet. This project will be probably be successful. "Okay...sounds good, let's do it"
2 -
Linux Evangelism (Score:5, Funny)
Brethern, it is the time of the Apocalypse!
Stand up and be saved!
*Thumps loudly on "Linux in a Nutshell"*
Who is ready to receive saaaaalvation?!
Re:Linux Evangelism (Score:5, Funny)
Let me be the first radical fundamentalist to ask whether you are some heathen using an IDE or one of the vi chosen?
Please separate yourselves into camps of worthy and unclean. ;-)
Re:Linux Evangelism (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Linux Evangelism (Score:2)
Re:Linux Evangelism (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Linux Evangelism (Score:2)
Re:Linux Evangelism (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Linux Evangelism (Score:3, Funny)
Not long ago, a tape emerged from the ruins of the Free Software movement that appeared to be a recording of its final moments. Because of gaps in it, however, and some unclear references, its authenticity is not airtight, although it is generally presumed credible.
Stallman: Now we have choice. ... Hackers, it's just something to put you to rest ... you'll be free, hackers, you'll be free ...
Sobbing in background
Stallman: Free at last. Free as in freedom.
Music and crying
Stallman: ... please
Nietzsche on Open Source (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Nietzsche on Open Source (Score:2)
Miracles speak for themselves (Score:4, Funny)
"You shall be Heeeaaaled!!!!"
"Praise Linus!!!!"
Re:Miracles speak for themselves (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Miracles speak for themselves (Score:2)
GASP! (Score:5, Funny)
You mean that calmly and rationally pointing out the benefits of something accomplishes more that foaming-at-the-mouth, in-your-face, mine-is-the-One-True-Way evangelism?
Nah, can't be. If things really worked that way, just think of all the time thats been wasted...
Re:GASP! (Score:2, Interesting)
Considering the number of Linux zealots [reference.com] that I've had the misfortune of meeting, I think not; your comment would tend to prove my point.
And by the way, I'm a Linux user, and have been for some time. I advocate Linux usage - just not rabidly.
Re:GASP! (Score:2)
I am reminded of an old Norwegian quote: (Score:3, Interesting)
It means little unless you know it's spoken from the perspective of a 15th century penguin salesman extolling the virtues of a soft sell vs. a hard sell. The latter is most necessary with an inferior product; if the quality of the merchandise can speak for itself, don't get in its way.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:I am reminded of an old Norwegian quote: (Score:2)
Hell, I've seen penguins here in the desert of Arizona.
Re:I am reminded of an old Norwegian quote: (Score:2)
LOL: (Score:2)
Made me laugh at least, though I'm not sure if you were going for funny mods
Kjella
The best way is to really 'show' them (Score:4, Funny)
Little off topic (Score:2, Interesting)
What I really need is a good, SHORT, list of information about linux and open source software that I can print out and give to him to read at his leasure so I can get on with showin
Re:Little off topic (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Little off topic (Score:2)
Re:Little off topic (Score:2)
2) Does he know what a kernel is? If not then don't mention anything about the kernel etc.
Why don't you just boot the computer up into xwindows and show him what kind of software he can use
Re:Little off topic (Score:3, Insightful)
Tell hime why it is good, i.e. not being force fed things by the marketing department of a certain big company but having choices (you could briefly mention the many distro options as an example of choice).
Mention that good design is leading the developmend instead.
Also think why the hell you used it yourself in the first place and more important why you kept using it. (Be carefull this answer doesn't get to geeky)
Jeroen
Re:Little off topic (Score:2)
So, your uncle, right?
Re:Little off topic (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Little off topic (Score:2)
Re:Little off topic (Score:2)
Is that emerge sync emerge -uD world going to make anything change, ever? If so, gentoo is probably a bad idea. Most folks are bothered by having their computer change. They're driven right round the bend by sudden, inexplicable-to-them changes. Debian Stable might be safer, since ``Stable'' means ``never changes''. I'm guessing that since the OP will be `` showing him Linux and telling him a bit
What? (Score:2)
Was that some kind of sick joke...?
Re:What? (Score:2)
Actually, as I discovered recently, Hellen Keller was (in)famous for being a highly influential author, speaker, socialist and possible communist [wikipedia.org]. It's amazing what can be written out of history because the truth is not a comfortable, heart-warming view of how someone 'should' have been...
Re:What? (Score:2)
Say what you will, but ol' Helen is probably the epitome of optimizing interpersonal communication. I can hardly tell a joke on Jabber without using a smiley, but she used her hands to read lips. That's like the speech equivalent of writing a graphics card driver in microcode.
I'm not saying I'm a big fan of her message, but I'm definitely impressed with her ability to deliver it, all things considered.
Order of Events (Score:3, Interesting)
LinuxAppeal (Score:3, Informative)
I figure the more people who petition companies the better so I've written a few petitions of my own on the site in hope that others will find them via google when searching for linux support for a product and petition the company as well.
Comment removed (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:This is downright silly. (Score:2)
It's already there. Or did you mean ``the same as''? It's just as good, unless you define ``as good as'' to mean ``identical to''.
Make a GNU/Linux system as easy to use as Windows ...
It's already there. Or did you mean ``the same as''? It's just as easy to use, unless you define ``as easy to use as'' to mean ``identical to''.
We already have those equivalents. Or did you mean ``exa
Re:This is downright silly. (Score:3, Insightful)
I think by as good as the parent simply means "offers the same features", that would include easy of use and computability.
Open Office doesn't have the same feature set as MS office. Maybe you consider that "identical to", but for most people of one program (or suite) lacks feature the other one has, then it isn't as good.
Particularly if you use those features.
There are lots of open source programs covering the same area as a commercial one, few are as good, or better. FireFox is a great example of on
Re:This is downright silly. (Score:2)
Justin.
Best Open Source Advocacy (Score:2, Interesting)
Meet Customers Needs (Score:4, Insightful)
You can have a top-notch techonlogy and the best minds in the world working on R&D and you can still fail if you do not satisfy customer requirements or needs or both.
Engineers do not get one thing: no invention can be spread around the world until it can be sold. In this world marketing and sales are just as important (if not more) as R&D and staying on bleeding edge. If you have a Linux box that cannot meet my needs, why the fuck would I buy it? Because somebody with a Ph.D worked on some programs in that box? Give me a fucking break.
Everybody is screaming about Linux and how great it is. I do not see it. Dell sells cheap Wintel boxes because that is what customers want: something cheap and easy. IBM invested money in new technology along with research; it sold its PC division to Lenovo. HP and Compaq had R&D... Now their joint venture is swimming down the toilet. The point is that it does not matter how cool YOU think Linux and Open Source are. They're not going to spread around the world unless people find them useful. No advocacy will help. You can write to tech magazines and give lectures to college students and that is fine; however, you won't be able to succeed until people start saying, "Wow, this Linux thing is really want I need." The keyword is "need." Not "want" or "cool" or "wow." Need for a cheap, effective tech solution is what can and will drive Open Source. This is pure business.
In this world everything is sold, not bought. Sell an Open Source solution to the public and you shall succeed. Nobody gives (or should give) a flying fuck about the technology and what it is inside. If you really want to push Open Source, show cost savings, productivity increase, and fewer losses contributed to the fact that Open Source is not Windows. Then people will talk to you :)
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Windows Exorcisms take time and patience (Score:2, Funny)
Surely there's something wrong here! (Score:3, Funny)
Yet I didn't see these methods listed anywhere in the article. Perhaps the author should surf Slashdot, or OSNews a bit more before his next article.
Who cares?!? (Score:3, Interesting)
And isn't that what is wrong with the world today. People need to worry about themselves and not about what other people are doing. (unless, of course, those other people are hurting other people)
Re:Who cares?!? (Score:5, Insightful)
People care about advocacy because computers, especially now that so many are interconnected, exhibit a strong network effect. The more people who use a given OS or architecture or whatever, the more likely developers will write programs for it and the more likely that costs will drop from economies of scale. Peripheral vendors and ISPs will support the most common configurations possible. That means if you want your life to have fewer computer hassles, you're better off recommending that others use OSes and such similar to the one you use -- otherwise you'll buy scanners that are unsupported, and your ISP won't give you tech support and if you need an obscure piece of software you might not be able to find it.
People do need to worry, at least somewhat, about what other people are doing, because what other people are doing usually affects the people observing, at least to some degree.
The individual is a part of a larger web, and the vibrations you send from your tiny part of the (metaphorical) web travel through it in ways not always perceived by you.
Try push polling (Score:2)
Push Polling [wikipedia.org] usually worx.
sample question:
"Would you be more likely or less likely to by ClosedSource/Proprietary/ClosedStandard Application [xml-dev.com] if you knew they were designed to trap you in becomming life-long customer (vendor lock-in)?" ?
Oh wait, that is not push-polling - That is the truth!!!.
What's definitely the wrong way... (Score:5, Insightful)
So I excitedly downloaded and burned some Mandrake 9.1 CDs, installed (amazingly painless), and entered this whole new world of Linux and Open Source.
There are many ways you could describe my reaction to the yawning gulf between expectation and reality: "furious backlash" would be one; "blind seething rage and betrayal" would be another. The catalogue of disasters and frustrations that followed left me cursing the names of the people who recommended Linux to me as this wonderful cure-all and utterly *hating* Linux with every fibre of my being. I actually stuck with it for a few more days and, after deciding that linux was the most pointless project I had ever had the misfortune of dabbling with, returned to the comparatively hassle-free bosom of Windows.
Luckily for me, the story didn't end there and some persistent and random lockups in Windows led me to re-install Linux (Mandrake 10, this time around) to see whether it was hardware or driver related (a dodgy fan on my graphics card, for what it's worth). This time around, with my expectations greatly lowered (in fact, by this stage, Linux had improved unrecognisably, and I was very pleased with its progress), I fell head-over-heels in love and haven't had Windows installed since.
But it could so easily have gone the other way; it is hard to explain just how much the hype followed by disappointment soured me on Linux at the time (an understatement!) and it is my firm belief that if I had been forewarned about the things that I could do in Windows but not in Linux, I would not have reacted so sharply. So now, when "recommending" Linux to the curious, I usually start with a list of negatives (some hardware may not work; you may not be able to run your favourite games; don't expect installation of software to follow the Windows model, or you'll be in a world of hurt) before extolling its non-pragmatic virtues ("It's an operating system with love in it!"). It's heartening that quite a few people are still willing to give it a shot even after hearing my litany of gloom :)
So in a nutshell, don't be a blind fanboy, or you will be Open Source's worst enemy; let people know that there will be concessions to make, but that many people still feel the switch is worth it. Make a special point of mentioning just how different and customisable it can be (show them a variety of WMs, from the absurdly minimalist (Ratpoision) to the wonderfully glitzy (Enlightenment) - this diversity and difference from the comparative homogeniety of Windows usually gets people curious, in my experience). Don't oversell it, as this is just a recipe for disaster.
Oh, and this post mainly deals with the casual home PC user, so might be a little off-topic - apologies for that :)
Re:What's definitely the wrong way... (Score:3, Insightful)
At first, the response was to tell him to buy a virus checker. He bought a £15 a month McAfee subscription but got suspicious when his PC slowed right down. He updated McAfee which found nothing and then uninstalled McAfee and installed AVG which found Sircam. After much swaering he asked "how I dealt with all this shit" at which point I said I don't have to, produced my laptop, showed off Linux
Listening to what people want is the best way (Score:3, Insightful)
I listen to what people are tell me about their computer experience:
It still amazes me the number of people who are willing to ditch Windows completely and learn something new. As long as you clearly explain the pros and cons of running Linux, most people are willing to try Linux. Where you see Linux get a bad rap is when a flaming OSS zealot installs Linux over a crashed Windows installation without first explaining to the user that their previous system, as they knew it, will be completely gone.
And contrary to popular /. opinion, Linux is not always the best choice:
I think the key to being a successful OSS advocate is simply to listen to needs of people. Many idealistic people would run FOSS software, but don't because they don't have the requisite knowledge (or time) to understand it. That's where a good OSS zealot can help people out. But at the same time, we have to realize that for those users who rely on Windows-centric "features", installing Linux would not be doing them a favor.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Listening to what people want is the best way (Score:3, Interesting)
My windows2000 upgrade from win98 detected the Linux partition and added a bootloader with the choice between the two.
IBMers going to San Diego? (Score:2)
I believe emphasis shouldn't be on OSS but... (Score:2)
open cd (Score:2)
it's much easier for some to learn by using than it is by listening...
Inspection analogy (Score:3, Insightful)
If you want to campaign for "Free software", then that is a different matter. I respect that point of view, but it's much harder. Anything worthwhile is probably going to be difficult.
Letter from Peruvian Congressman (Score:4, Insightful)
I think that you all should take a moment to read through that so that you can remind yourself that open source is the "more correct" form of software development.
How to talk to businesspeople (Score:4, Insightful)
The #1 product in the market sucks. The company that makes it is evil. This free software you never heard of is the best. It is written collectively by hippies. Everything should be free, including YOUR products.
RIGHT:
The #1 selling product in the market is not the best in the market. If we implement [Linux, etc.], it will be CHEAPER, it will be MORE SECURE, it will produce LESS DOWNTIME, it is EASIER TO UPGRADE, you will increase your PROFITS by reducing costs.
Nobody likes an evangelist (Score:3, Insightful)
When advocating open source, what problem are you solving? I used to advocate open source solutions for individuals and companies, but now I just give options. I still include open source options where they are a good solution, but that's not always true. People who like to play the newest popular games should probably not be switching to linux. Part of advocacy is knowing when to shut up. Pushing a particular solution to all problems, regardless of requirements is a major turnoff to pretty much everyone.
so how do you tell a .... (Score:3, Insightful)
according to the article you have to speak in their language....
Hmmmmph....
Re:Here's my take on it (Score:5, Insightful)
> again, that low level languages like C and
> Forth produce more efficient, faster, and
> easier to maintain code than today's so
> called high level languages.
How's that? So it's actually better to manually malloc and free memory than to let a GC take care of it? Surely you're just jesting!
As someone who's currently wrapping the Evolution C API in Ruby [rubyforge.org], I can assure you that writing Ruby code is much easier than writing the corresponding C code.
I'm not sure why this would be considered a "Linux strength",. since all the good high level languages - Ruby, Python, Perl, etc - all run on Linux, also.
Re:Here's my take on it (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Here's my take on it (Score:2, Insightful)
Why was Ruby written?
Re:Here's my take on it (Score:2)
Re:Here's my take on it (Score:3, Interesting)
> cpu time is not
True. But it's seldom the bottleneck.
> Although you may save 400 Development hours
> you can lose millions of hours of runtime
> productivity.
Or you may save millions of hours by being able to quickly and accurately implement features to help the users of your produce get work done.
Re:Here's my take on it (Score:3, Funny)
I thought evangelists didn't believe in Evolution.
Re:Here's my take on it (Score:2)
It's funny that you would bring out this example - it is probably the one that I personally would consider to be the most concrete example of the superiority of low(er) level coding. Over the past few years, I've gotten quite a bit of experience debugging memory leaks and found that there probably isn't a Windows or Linux garbage collection implementation that is fool proof
Re:Here's my take on it (Score:2)
> collection implementation that is fool proof
Right, of course, it's always possible to leak memory. Just add something to a Map and never let go of it. Not much a GC can do if the application insists that it still has a reference to the object. But other than stuff like that, I feel like most high-level language GC implementations can take care of all but the pathological cases.
> ALWAYS use the "sizeof"
Right, those are good C memory mgmt guide
Re:Here's my take on it (Score:4, Insightful)
If it's easier, and cheaper, to plug blocks together using Java,
I prefer C and Perl over Java and
Re:Here's my take on it (Score:2)
Re:Here's my take on it (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Here's my take on it (Score:2)
Re:Here's my take on it (Score:4, Insightful)
My only explanation for your post is that where you said high level you meant low level, and vice versa. Could you reference the evidence that C and Forth are easier to maintain than higher-level languages (faster and more efficient they might be, but that is very rarely a performance criteria in modern software)? C is, in my experience, more likely to have bugs and security defects, and be far less maintainable, as well as more likelt to be unsafe. I agree that bad code is bad code in any language, but since C seems to tolerate it more than other languages, surely that shows it is a problem with C as well as the developer?
There is a reason that the trend has been for higher and higher level languages, and C is a lone aberration that bucks the trend. We don't program in assembly much any more for the same reason that one day we won't program in C much any more. For a kernel, C is obviously the right language, but for most other applications it is an odd choice than can usually only be justified because it is the language that the developer is comfortable with.
Re:Here's my take on it (Score:2, Interesting)
Java can be faster if you use a profiling JVM, (well unless you profile your C code and get gentoo to re-emerge with using the profile every other week)
this should also apply to
Java is also much easier to maintain that C, because it's almost exactly the same as C with enough bits missing to let it run in a Virtual Machine and some extra rules inplace.
Of couse bad C is probably easier to maintain that bad Java and Bad C++.
In
Re:Here's my take on it (Score:5, Insightful)
Now, I think the problem really is that the "High Level Languages" make people think that they are programmers when they are not. People who have not developed the skill necessary to write good code in any language can jump in and produce results. Those results might be low par and hard to maintain but they have been produced, and that is what the folks with the money want. They don't care that the code is sloppy and poorly designed. They just see the program working. Later on down the road they might care when they have to spend double the money to maintain the beast. But that is for another day.
Re:Here's my take on it (Score:2)
You just keep bit shifting, then I'll be productive for my customer, mmkay?
BTW is the resume on the website yours? Because there isn't a whole lot of programming experience there (lots of (database) sysadministration though, but not programming).
Re:Here's my take on it (Score:2)
It would seem to me that if you wanted the most efficient site, you would code all your web apps in C. For, as we all know, it IS the most efficient language out there, and should be used in any programming project.
Re:Here's my take on it (Score:2, Insightful)
Granted, but with the way hardware is going it's not really a big factor most of the time.
This is the same thing.
It seems unlikely there's empirical evidence to prove this, primarily because it's unlikely to be true in any fair test. Higher-level languages are quicker to develop in and less likely to have fatal
Re:Here's my take on it (Score:2)
Re:Here's my take on it (Score:4, Insightful)
I demand that my personal bridge engineers personally hand-select the grains of steel that they'll use to custom-design my unique bridge that won't use any of the last 5,000 years of bridge engineering experience. That's the only path to quality, you know. And back away from the libc, fella! If you won't hand-roll open(), then I don't want you writing my web browser.
By the way, what crack-smokers took you seriously enough to give you +5? Seriously, man, good job! That's one of the more successful trolls I've seen in a while.
Re:Here's my take on it (Score:2)
How on Earth this got modded up is beyond me, it's pure drivel, or maybe a clever joke the mods didn't get.
If you're not bit shifting hot registers at runtime then you're not programming. Plain and simple. You're just plugging different blocks together and hoping like hell it will work. How would you feel if they designed bridges like that?
How do you think anything complex is designed? One person doesn't sit down and design a whole computer, or every part of a car. You use a combination of existing th
Re:Not to be picky, but ... (Score:2)
Probably he meant O(log n), as in big-O notation [wikipedia.org], as in time-complexity [wikipedia.org].
Re:For fuck's sake, LEARN TO WRITE. (Score:2)
Re:The Slashdot Double-Standard (Score:5, Insightful)
Really, we could write articles about how MS should sell its software as a superiour product, but they seem to feel the need to bash the competition instead ("only communists use open source!").
Re:The Slashdot Double-Standard (Score:2, Insightful)
In the other case, it's advocating something for the benefit of a company- more money, vendor lock-in, closed standards, closed source
I fail to see how this is a double standard. This goes beyond picking one piece of software over another.
Re:The Slashdot Double-Standard (Score:2)
*Primarily speaking of the so called admins that never ran anything besides Windows and possibly DOS. They tend to be overly fanatical as well.
Re:The Slashdot Double-Standard (Score:2)
Re:The Slashdot Double-Standard (Score:2)
Microsoft has never threatened anyone using Linux. In fact, many people at Microsoft also run Linux and have it connected to Microsoft's network.
There's also projects to get Windows to play with Linux more nicely, with better Samba integration and such.
See, it's people like you that this article's talking about. Quit spreading FUD and find the truth.
Re:I for one think that linux's kernel is too comp (Score:2)
It'll be worth waiting for! (Score:2)
Cause I hear it'll run Duke Nukem Forever, right out of the box!
Re:It's not what you say . . . (Score:2)
Your opinion is just as valuable as an opition expressed by a Republican. If you think that the message sent by Republicans sucks, it does not meant that that is bad message. It means that YOU think that way of the message. I am not a Republican myself, but whenever I
Re: (Score:2)