Justin Carmony » Open Source

UTOSC 2010

Justin Carmony — Mon, 27 Sep 2010 16:10:19 +0000

One thing I haven’t mentioned much this year is the Utah Open Source Conference that is being held in two weeks. Larry Cafiero, a.k.a Larry the Fedora Guy, has written a nice summary of how he feels UTOSC “has been building up to a top-notch, not-to-be-missed show.”

During the course of the year, the FOSS traveling salvation show in North America wends its way around the nation to end up, finally, at the Utah Open Source Conference (UTOSC) in Salt Lake City in October before taking a hiatus for the holidays. Then of course the new year, FOSS-wise, starts with the Southern California Linux Expo (SCALE) in February.

There’s only one word for those who might want to skip the last-of-the-year Linux expo: “Don’t!”

Quietly and with little fanfare, UTOSC has been building up to a top-notch, not-to-be-missed show that is beginning to draw deserved attention — and people — from outside immediate Utah area. In fact, in the last four years it has grown to become the best community computer conference in the Mountain West.

UTOSC will be held from Oct. 7-9 at the Miller Campus of Salt Lake Community College in Salt Lake City. Attendees who register before Saturday can save 30 percent on the price of admission to the three-day event. Regular admission to UTOSC is $70 for a full-access pass, $25 for an expo pass with entrance to try-it lab workshops and $15 for an expo pass.

I’ll give you a little hint: You can get %50 off if you register with the Discount Code UPHPU. So I highly recommend if you would like to learn about some very cool software that is free, to check it out. Unfortunately, this year I won’t be presenting, since I kind of got busy and forgot to get my abstract in before the deadline. Probably next year then.

Utah Monthly Geek Lunch

Justin Carmony — Thu, 28 May 2009 19:27:28 +0000

Just thought I’d advertise this a little. I’m going to this month’s Geek Lunch in Layton at Pad Thai. I’ve never actually been there before, but I’ve heard goo things. If you’re in the Layton area on Friday around 12:30 to 2:00, come have some Thai food! They are also having one in SLC and Provo area. Here is the info:

Salt Lake County

Fri, May 29, 12:30pm – 2pm
My Thai, 1425 S 300 W, SLC, UT (map)

Davis/Weber County

Fri, May 29, 12:30pm – 2pm
Pad Thai, 1986 N Hill Field Rd #8, Layton, UT (map)

Utah County

Fri, May 29, 12:30pm – 2pm
Thai Chili Gardens, 430 West 800 North, Orem, Ut (map)

You can see the original post here.

Speaking: Utah PHP Usergroup – Streamlined Web Development

Why Google Chrome is Good for FireFox

Justin Carmony — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 23:50:31 +0000

I’ve heard time after time people saying how FireFox might take a backseat to Google Chrome. However, I actually think Chrome and FireFox will benefit from each other. I think FireFox has nothing but to gain from Google Chrome. Let me give you an example why:

My brother Bryce works at Best Buy. They’ve been selling Apple Macs for the last few months and Bryce hates selling them to customers. The reason is people come in, say they want a Mac because they’ve heard so much about them, don’t listening to any suggestions or tips, and just buy it. That would be great, except usually within 1-2 weeks they come back wanting to return their Mac. Why Bryce asks why, one of the classic responses is “Well, I couldn’t find Internet Explorer.” These customers have been so accustomed to doing things their way that they don’t understand how to use anything else.

FireFox’s biggest challenge is getting the word out about FireFox and how it can be used to browse the internet. So many people think the only way you access the internet is through Internet Explorer. The concept of web browsers is just foreign to them. However, if Google, a name they know, introduces a better product than Internet Explorer, people will get the idea of there is more than Internet Explorer. Once people understand there is more to web browsers than Internet Explorer, people will be open to using something like FireFox.

I honestly believe the people who will like Chrome will like it as an alternative to IE. If people like FireFox, I can hardly imagine anyone picking Chrome over FireFox. People love the extensions, themes, performance, and all-around feel of FireFox. I think Chrome will only take a bite out of IE’s, and help people discover FireFox, not anything to take away from FireFox.

Besides, Chrome is Open Source, and if anything really cool shows up in Chrome, FireFox could implement it. So all of your nay-sayers about Chrome being the end of FireFox, I think FireFox will only benefit from the new browser on the market.

Why Are Some Open Source Advocates Hypocrites?

Justin Carmony — Fri, 18 Jul 2008 13:49:58 +0000

Edit: This article was intended to specifically address certain types of of open source advocates, as stated in the title. This article is not intended to label all open source advocates as hypocrites. See comments by the author below.

Today, and almost every day, I’ll read an article about a proprietary computer company (Microsoft, Apple, etc) and “open source” technologies and communities. Every time I read them I see a large percentage of “user participants” in comments, responses, etc. that make me cringe.

Today’s example was ZDNet’s article “Open source should support Apple over Psystar“. I thought it was a great, simple article:

I have been wracking my brain all day for an angle on this Apple-Psystar story (great work by Adrian Kingsley-Hughes) and I can’t come up with one.

Save this. Open source should be supporting Apple here.

The writer goes on to basically say that the Open Source world relies on users respecting the licenses and agreements made by the people who download their software. Apple has a EULA and Psystar is basically breaking that agreement. She admits that Apple’s EULA is nasty and removes any rights for a user, but that user by choice bought an Apple product.

However, what kind of comments show up?

If you accept Apple EULA you give your soul to the devil (and all your possession must be Apple approved, you cannot use the software to its full potential: like on a REAL computer, you surrender all freedom and you are sucked down into the whorst artificial monopoly ever witness by mankind)

However their kernel choice is an open source kernel, and if this is the part that is being modified then the issue is moot.

Apple doesn’t support Open Source. Where’s my version of iTunes for Linux? Glad to see they were able to take KHTML and make Safari out of it. Where’s the love in return?

There isn’t any. Recompiling iTunes for another *nix kernel would be trivial. It’s missing because they don’t think the open source community matters to them.

I say let ‘em swing in the wind.

hell no open source should not support apple over psystar. i have download the os 10.5 patch myself along with a copy of os 10.5. why would i pay apple 2400 dollars for a computer that is not as fast as the one i am using, that i built for less than 1500 dollars(including xp). as far as the eula is concerned it means nothing to me. i signature is not their. as i have stated before once i buy a piece of software i will do whatever i want with it.

Here is the problem in a nutshell: Proprietary Companies (Microsoft, IBM, etc) have legally fought Open Source to snuff out competition. Open Source people fought back for their rights and defend them. They declared that open source “is about choice!” Its allowing people to choose different software than the typical proprietary solutions. These open source projects have adopted licenses to prevent people abusing their Intellectual Property. While Open Source people might scream at me for saying that, in essence that is what all of these open source projects are: intellectual property that is owned by the public, instead of by a person or corporation.

So open source advocates scream and yell when people violate the intellectual property of the public. However, when it is the intellectual property of a company, especially someone like Microsoft or Apple, that it doesn’t matter because they are “evil.” Regardless of the hundreds, thousands, millions, and billions of dollars they have invested into their IP, its okay to disregard that due to the fact their “business principles don’t line up with mine.”

It is a double standard that thousands and thousands of Open Source users are taking. It is a total crime for a business to abuse open source licenses, however its okay to for users to abuse business’s licenses. When companies mess with open source, open source users run to the law for protection. Yet when the roles are reversed, open source users say “screw the law” and go with their own ‘moral compass’.

My question to these people are: what about my choice?

I’m willing to pay for my copy of windows. I support Microsoft in their endeavor to make better products. I enjoy programming in .NET because it saves me time. That is my choice. I love my MacBook Pro. I like the quickness and responsiveness I get from it. It is my choice to buy from a company whose value is in their Quality Control.

But hypocritical open source advocates tell me I’m wrong and evil because I’m making the “wrong” choice. I’ve seen a serious trend with open source users that instead of arguing for choice, are arguing what I should choose. Yes! By all means you can choose whatever you want to do. If you want to run only on open source technologies, more power to you. But don’t call me “evil” for being willing to pay for software that makes my life easier.

I support open source. I love what it is doing to the technology industry. However, there are many open source users that I cannot stand. Stand up for choice, but stop being hypocrites when telling me that my choices are wrong, because thats not choice at all.