[India] Linux: Government seen creating monopoly

["Irfan Khan" <khania2@super.net.pk>]

Linux: Government seen creating monopoly
SUDHA NAGARAJ

TIMES NEWS NETWORK[ FRIDAY, JANUARY 03, 2003 05:45:25 AM ]

NEW DELHI: LINUX enthusiasts can rest easy. They need no longer be 
disappointed by the government’s flip-flop over crowning Linux as the 
platform of choice.

Policies are not framed overnight. Also, adoption of technology is 
one thing, while mandating it is not as simple. Especially when you 
are talking open source software. And talk there is.

Especially in the seemingly-empty Electronics Niketan, which houses 
the Department of Information Technology. After a series of closed 
door meetings with industry, developers and academia, the government 
is now faced with a dilemma.

Adoption of open source software for governance and education is 
alright. But is it advisable to mandate it, locking out other sources 
altogether?

No, says a white paper doing the rounds in the IT Department.

This move would be completely contrary to what is expected of a 
government, which can and should offer recommended guidelines (and 
naturally follow them), but not create a monopoly situation that does 
not differ from existing proprietary software monopolies.

So what is the way out? Give preference, by ‘mandating’ a process of 
software/technology evaluation, selection and procurement which 
‘includes’ open source — comparing it on functional and financial 
criteria to other solutions.

While ‘functional’ is the keyword (it would be self-defeating to 
reject a software for which there is no functional open source 
equivalent offered), it is easy to lock out an open source solution 
by specifying a functionality that is proprietary. For example, 
“ability to read Microsoft Word documents without loss of formatting 
or content”.

“This is a trap, as only Microsoft Word actually knows the structure 
of the documents it creates and this structure is a closely guarded 
trade secret,” points out the paper.

Which means that the requirement specification should read, “Should 
be able to store documents in an open and well-documented format that 
makes it easy for other applications to access information contained 
in the document, without interaction with the original developer of 
the software that created the original document.”

The other tricky question is whether to adopt products or the 
process. A product such as the Linux OS would mean no cost, increased 
stability, enhanced security, better functionality, adherence to 
published standards and inter-operability. But then these benefits 
accrue only because the source is available for all to view, for all 
to modify, has been worked on by a large, diffuse team, and the 
source and binaries are free for all to distribute respectively.

“As the most visible poster child of the movement, Linux has gained 
instant name and recognition, with enviable branding,” an independent 
technology consulting firm said. While the Linux OS does represent 
the public development model or Free/Libre OpenSource Software 
(FLOSS), the government would be better advised to consider the 
development process as criterion.

This is important because a large number of products that ‘run under 
Linux’ have started appearing, but are mostly manifestations of the 
closed source model of development.

With solutions constantly evolving, separating the development model 
from the software would ultimately result in another operating 
environment that mirrors, for example, the Microsoft set of products 
and their inherent weaknesses.

source: 
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/cms.dll/html/uncomp/articleshow?ar
tid=33191594