open source

It is not enough to have Richard Stallman travel around the world endlessly giving standard Free Software speeches among other things repeating how Open Source is not the same thing as Free Software and how the operating system widely known as "Linux" is actually "GNU/Linux" (because GNU project in fact started that OS). It is not even enough to have Free Software supporters constantly keep pointing these things out and arguing why they believe so.

Due to the increased diffusion of "Open Source" as a term this article suggests its gradual phase out in favor of the original "Free Software" term and renaming of the "Open Source Initiative" into "Free Software Business Initiative" (no matter how controversial the proposal may be).

There are three ways we could look at Microsoft's recent approaches to the "Open Source" phenomenon.

• 1. They are in a process towards genuinely embracing Free Software or Open Source.

In our earlier article, "Facts and Friction on Open Source and Free Software" we have explained where "Open Source" is coming from and what is its relation to Free Software and the Free Software Foundation that represents it. One of the points made was that the term Open Source deliberately de-emphasized a certain aspect of what defines Free Software as originally specified by the FSF in order to make Free Software, albeit under the new term, better appeal to the business world.

BluetunA is an open source software developed in Java for Bluetooth-enabled mobile phones that allows people to connect to each other and exchange music tips on the fly. It is an example of mobile music sharing and mobile social software at their dawn, not allowing music sharing right now because of DRM and copyright issues.

To further expand the idea and the software we're looking for contributors, so to create a community around its development and allow its adoption and diffusion.

A recently revised article about the differences between "Free Software" and "Open Source", by Richard Stallman.

Something of relevance to this is the recent controversy developed around the meaning of the term "Open Source" which puts some doubt on whether "Open Source" as a term is really any clearer than "Free Software". The real truth about the term was spelled out by Eric Raymond anyway, it is basically a way to conceal the ideology and purism of FSF.

Is "Open Source" Now Completely Meaningless?