On Thu, 2004-11-25 at 19:47 +0530, Ramanraj K wrote:
have to take what is being served on a plate and eat it. The advocacy these days is more on merely *using* free software, that is much, much easier than *developing* free software. A government that cares for the welfare of its people would never ignore free software. Probably
[...]
I am sure mere representations to the Govt. of WB should bring in desired changes, and PIL or other action would only come last of all, if necessary at all.
Unfortunately, while there is considerable merit in reason why we need to use Free software, mere representations might not suffice.
M$ is not merely selling software, it is selling solutions i.e. software which serve a purpose. Some of their selling tactics could be a reasonable demonstration of how their software helped solve the given problem in the tender. And most importantly, how this software can be installed, used to solved the given problem and supported by either them (very unlikely) or their dealers.
In our case, representation might not be enough. A demonstration could be better, but again that doesn't help much. *Having* an organization come up and say that "we will install, solve the problem and give you support", is the answer.
After all, using Free Software is like the ultra-sensitive issue of caste-based reservation. There is an important social objective behind a policy of using Free Software. But unless the software actually goes ahead and solves the problem (and not merely trumpet that it can change the world and/or do anything), it will only hinder progress - in this case, egovernance.
The babus might not articulate this question explicitly - but their nagging doubts will always be "Ok. This is great software - technically and socially. But are you going to come and install it for us? Are you going to train our staff?Are you going to come and help us when we are stuck? Oh? Try Linux vendors, you say? Why dont they come up and apply in the tendering process then?". And we are back to the same problem. Guess who works best in the selling/pitching/marketing games in government tenders?
My point is - We need to encourage industry participation in the evangelising process. Presentations should be made by not only LUG people (who can articulate that Free software be given serious thought and preference), but also actual industry people who will negotiate contracts with the government. Regardless of how much you loath the commercial world, you might actually have to help them come up with convincing arguments/presentations to get the job done.
I believe any Linux evangelising is deficient unless it addresses three points at the same time:
1. Advocacy - Technical and most importantly, philosophical reasons to use Free software.
Reason: Without advocacy people use Free software for the wrong reasons (e.g. cost), and will move on when these reasons do not hold (e.g. [hypothetical] M$ coming up with a Windows version which cost Rs. 0, and charges Rs. 3000/year for updates.).
2. Industry support - People who can actually go ahead and help government and the rest of the industry use the software, working on a purely service model, of course, for a fee.
Reason: You cant force everybody to be a geek. They need to get their work done. Regardless of how much they feel for the cause.
3. Interoperability - Be vigilant, take action and ensure that users of Free software are not discriminated. Scream at companies and governments which incorporate proprietary software, technology and data into their policies and processes. e.g. forms/applications in Word format, IE only websites, windows only hardware, windows only software etc.
Reason: You cant make people give up everything and use Free software, and then shrug/rant when essential resources cannot be accessed. Keep making the world a better place while inviting people to it. :)
You miss out any one of the above, and you are only going to ensure that people desert the field in a very short time, most of the time vowing never to come back.
- Sandip