Softpanorama

May the source be with you, but remember the KISS principle ;-)
Home Switchboard Unix Administration Red Hat TCP/IP Networks Neoliberalism Toxic Managers
(slightly skeptical) Educational society promoting "Back to basics" movement against IT overcomplexity and  bastardization of classic Unix

OSS in Developing Countries Bulletin, 2005

2005

[Apr 06, 2005] Comparing Open Source Licenses GPL vs. BSDL

[Apr 06, 2005] Schwartz swipes at the GPL Builder AU Program At Work  "Imagine a developing nation that elects to use free software in the construction of its intellectual property and then finds that it has a rather predatory obligation to give back all the intellectual property to the wealthiest nation in the world that happens to be the author of the GPL," Schwartz said.

Schwartz singled out the GPL provision that says source code may be mixed with other code only if the resultant code also is governed by the GPL. That provision is intended to create a body of software that must remain liberated from proprietary constraints. But Schwartz said that some people he's spoken to dislike it because it precludes them from using open source software as a foundation for proprietary projects.

"Economies and nations need intellectual property (IP) to pull themselves up by their own bootstraps. I've talked to developing nations, representatives from academia and manufacturing companies that had begun to incorporate GPL software into their products, then... found they had an obligation to deliver their IP back into the world," Schwartz said.

The GPL purports to have freedom at its core, but it imposes on its users "a rather predatory obligation to disgorge all their IP back to the wealthiest nation in the world", the United States, where the GPL originated, Schwartz said. "If you look at the difference between the licence we elected to use and GPL, there are no obligations to economies or universities or manufacturers that take the source code and embed it in [their own] code."

[Apr 06, 2005] Sun slams predatory GPL - Computeract!ve

In his most elaborate response yet to the criticism Schwartz said the GPL is unfair and "predatory". The GPL requires developers to publish all the code that they mix in with the original GPL code, where the CDDL allows them to guard their work if they want to.

"Imagine a developing nation that elects to use free software in the construction of its intellectual property and then finds that is has a rather predatory obligation to give back all the intellectual property to the wealthiest nation in the world that happens to be the author of the GPL," Schwartz noted.

The GPL is wrongly used as a way force developers to share their work because the creators have a hidden agenda of forcing a social model on the world, the Sun executive claimed.

He described the authors of the GPL as "individuals and companies that want to use intellectual property models to define social models and economic models rather than intellectual property models."

The controversy over the GLP has led to the Open Source Initiative (OSI)to reform the system for using open source code under licence. The latest version of the license, version 2, was released in 1991.

Linux Pipeline Sun's Schwartz Equates GPL With 'Colonialism'

Schwartz in particular targeted the General Public License, used by many open-source initiatives, in a talk before 700 attendees of the Open Source Business Conference in San Francisco on Tuesday. Under the GPL, developers are required to publish or "give back" their work to the general community. Such licensing practices work to the advantage of the United States, which already enjoys a technology lead over many parts of the world, Schwartz said.

"I do not believe in intellectual-property colonialism," he declared.

Sun took a sounder approach in using the Mozilla Public License as the model for its Sun Community Development and Distribution License, Schwartz said. The CDDL was created for OpenSolaris, the open-source version of Sun's Unix operating system. Sun will make Solaris 10 available as open-source code sometime in the second quarter. The CDDL allows proprietary products to be built on top of open-source code and allows a Third World developer to produce a product for sale in the United States and elsewhere.

Schwartz said he has talked to representatives from academic institutions and developing countries that want the opportunity to sell software they produce with open-source code. The GPL inflicts "a rather predatory obligation to disgorge their IP [intellectual property] back to the wealthiest nation in the world," the United States, he noted. Instead of meeting such a requirement, poorer societies need the right to use open-source code to "bootstrap" their own economic development, he said.

But not everyone agrees. On Wednesday at the same conference, a supporter of Third World development, Lawrence Lessig, law professor at Stanford University and founder of the school's Center for the Internet and Society, expressed doubt that the GPL was a future source of technological imperialism.

Lessig said he has discussed the issue with Brazilians, and they were less concerned with the terms of open-source licenses than with not having access to the technology at all. Members of the Brazilian government told him Microsoft representatives have warned them that open-source software costs more in total cost of ownership than Windows, he said. The Brazilians told him, "We'd rather invest in a free-software infrastructure. It buys commitment to Brazilian society, building up computing expertise, as opposed to sending our capital abroad," Lessig said.

Schwartz swipes at the GPL - ZDNet UK News   Schwartz correctly noted that due to its anarchistic nature The GPL imposes a 'predatory obligation to disgorge IP back to the wealthiest nation in the world'

Schwartz singled out the GPL provision that says source code may be mixed with other code only if the resultant code also is governed by the GPL. That provision is intended to create a body of software that must remain liberated from proprietary constraints. But Schwartz said that some people he's spoken to dislike it because it precludes them from using open source software as a foundation for proprietary projects.

"Economies and nations need intellectual property (IP) to pull themselves up by their own bootstraps. I've talked to developing nations, representatives from academia and manufacturing companies that had begun to incorporate GPL software into their products, then... found they had an obligation to deliver their IP back into the world," Schwartz said.

The GPL purports to have freedom at its core, but it imposes on its users "a rather predatory obligation to disgorge all their IP back to the wealthiest nation in the world", the United States, where the GPL originated, Schwartz said. "If you look at the difference between the licence we elected to use and GPL, there are no obligations to economies or universities or manufacturers that take the source code and embed it in [their own] code."

[Jul 2005] Top Tech News - Software - Sun's Jonathan Schwartz Slams Open-Source Licensing Model Schwartz said the GPL  "exports a form of IP colonialism to nations seeking to create their own means of production" and demand that they return their source code back to developed countries.

The GPL governs a significant number of projects in the open-source software community. But its use is tantamount to economic imperialism, Schwartz believes.

In his speech, Schwartz said that the GPL expressly limits choice by disallowing the inclusion of non-GPL code into GPL projects. He added that it "exports a form of IP colonialism to nations seeking to create their own means of production."

Those who use the GPL as a foundation for proprietary software dislike having to give their intellectual property "back into the world," Schwartz said.

Unfolding Roadmap

As an alternative to the GPL, Schwartz praised the company's Community Development and Distribution License (CDDL), a variant of the Mozilla Public License.

Sun has already started using this license strategy with the release of Solaris source code.

In addition to his GPL comments, Schwartz also addressed criticism surrounding Sun's decision not to release Java  as open-source software. The refusal to go with a proprietary scheme is to prevent Java from forking, he noted.

License Department

Schwartz's comments illustrate the increasing complexity of licensing, especially in the open-source realm, said Yankee Group analyst Dana Gardner.

"Not long ago, there were only a couple of open-source licenses," he said. "Now, you've got many, and there are many more being created."

The result is that some companies will develop their own, as Sun has done, or tweak existing licenses to suit their needs. Gardner praised Sun's willingness to address the issue directly. But even with this kind of clarity, companies should be ready for more confusion, rather than less.

"We're beginning to enter

Schwartz Attacks GPL; Sun's Mention of "Stewardship" Has People Thinking of Java

At the inaugural Open Source Business Conference, which opened today in San Francisco, Jonathan Schwartz has been giving a keynote. We bring here an early on-the-spot report, written by former JDJ editor-in-chief and LinuxWorld Magazine founding editor, Alan Williamson.

... ... ..

On the subject of Java, Schwartz also addressed criticism of the alleged hypocrisy of Sun's message for not having released Java under GPL.

He answered this criticism by asserting that the licensing of Java was not the issue: Sun wants to keep Java from forking into different incompatible versions, thus depriving the many companies that rely on Java as a standard of their business opportunity.

Schwartz continued to discuss GPL, issuing a cautionary warning regarding the use of this particular license noting that Sun "believes in IP" but not in "IP colonialism." He talked about how licenses imply an obligation and one must be very careful to read the small print.

Finally Schwartz tailed off, talking about how a product should be adopted because it's better and not because it's free.

Sun Believes In IP But Not In IP Colonialism, Says Schwartz at Open Source Conference @ JDJ

Schwartz Attacks GPL; Sun's Mention of "Stewardship" Has People Thinking of Java

At the inaugural Open Source Business Conference, which opened today in San Francisco, Jonathan Schwartz has been giving a keynote. We bring here an early on-the-spot report, written by former JDJ editor-in-chief and LinuxWorld Magazine founding editor, Alan Williamson.

Jonathan Schwartz, President and COO of Sun Microsystems, today opened up the spring Open Source Business Conference (OSBC) in San Francisco. The OSBC is aimed at the business side of the open source ecosystem, with delegates ranging from a wide range of areas. It is fair to characterize this community as comprising "influencers" or decision makers, and it was to this audience profile that Schwartz pitched his keynote.

Schwartz opened up his discussion on standards by noting historical success stories, examples of where standards worked. For example the canal system in Victorian England with their standard widths and lock sizes, through to the railroad system in the US with its standard guage. By standardizing on a platform, more opportunity was created.

In the first of many swipes at Microsoft (who incidentally are co-sponsors of OSBC and will be speaking later on in the day), Schwartz highlighted a story of Thomas Edison who initially attempted to get his DC standard for electricity adopted instead of AC. He achieved this by illustrating how unsafe AC was by "frying dogs and farm animals" in the hope of promoting how safe DC was in comparison. Not much seems to have changed in this modern economy!

Open Source, as far Schwartz is concerned, is about lowering the barrier to entry and creating opportunity. Just as telcos are giving away their mobile phones, Schwartz sees a day where automobile manufacturers may give away cars to consumers to garner a whole new suite of chargeable services. Again, hammering home the point that free doesn't necessarily equate to "no revenue" but instead means "more opportunity to create revenue."

Hot on the heels of the Sun's announcement of OpenSolaris, Schwartz made countless references to this as being "single largest contribution to the open source world" any company had ever made. He continued to address the concerns he had heard in the marketplace that Sun was attempting to "steal away" customers from Linux, saying that on the contrary Sun believes there is more than just one community, that many communities exist and more are being generated; that a rising tide floats all boats.

By contrast it was interesting to hear Schwartz portray Sun as the all-embracing company. Contrary to many historical keynotes when Sun and JBoss were locked in battle, Schwartz made a number of references to JBoss as a shining example of open source in action, both in terms of its business model and how it has utilized the open standardization that Java has created.

On the subject of Java, Schwartz also addressed criticism of the alleged hypocrisy of Sun's message for not having released Java under GPL.

He answered this criticism by asserting that the licensing of Java was not the issue: Sun wants to keep Java from forking into different incompatible versions, thus depriving the many companies that rely on Java as a standard of their business opportunity.

Schwartz continued to discuss GPL, issuing a cautionary warning regarding the use of this particular license noting that Sun "believes in IP" but not in "IP colonialism." He talked about how licenses imply an obligation and one must be very careful to read the small print.

Finally Schwartz tailed off, talking about how a product should be adopted because it's better and not because it's free.

Free Software Magazine - When free meets proprietaryThree free applications on proprietary systems, three proprietary applications on free systems. Published on paper in: April, 2005 (will be free on the 15th of May, 2005 )

By Daniel O. Escasa

In a dream world, all software would be free. However, we spend enough time with our eyes open to realize that some situations call for proprietary software, either as a desktop or as a server application, on a free system. On the other hand, those stuck with a proprietary operating system can still enjoy free software applications. This article will list a few situations where free software and proprietary software can mix, and give three examples of each.

Why free and proprietary can mix

Examine this scenario: your company is moving your servers over to a free system. The trouble is, you have an Oracle database that’s been running for x years and it’s tweaked so perfectly you can’t afford the time and effort to scrub it and migrate to a free relational database management system (RDBMS). Rest easy: Oracle is available on free systems, albeit certified only on certain distributions.

Another scenario: your company policy is free systems on desktops, with a few selected exceptions. You’re one of the poor sods who pass the Free-OS exemption test because of some esoteric application not available on free systems. However, your company can’t afford a license for MS Office, and you do need a Microsoft file-compatible word processor, presentation-authoring tool, or spreadsheet. OpenOffice.org to the rescue.

Situations such as those above are not limited to corporate desktops. Your home PC might have an important proprietary application that doesn’t have any free counterpart. You can’t resort to dual-boot because that just takes too much time. So, you can run an emulator on a free system to run that proprietary application. In an extreme case – e.g., your software won’t run in an emulator – you might be forced into Windows but choose to run mostly free applications.

You’re one of the poor sods who pass the Free-OS exemption test because of some esoteric application not available on free systems. OpenOffice.org to the rescue

For this article's purposes, treatment of proprietary systems will be limited to Windows 9x/ME/NT/2K because they’re the dominant platforms. Other proprietary systems are OS/2, BeOS, and MacOS X, and most free software applications for Windows are available for them as well. I will define free systems as GNU/Linux and the BSDs and I will refer to them as “Freenix” for convenience.

Free software on proprietary systems

The OpenOffice.org suite and the Firefox Web browser are the most prominent free software applications on proprietary systems. In addition, server applications such as Apache, MySQL, and PostgreSQL are also available for Windows.

OpenOffice.org began life as StarOffice, an office suite by a German company named Star Division. StarOffice was available for Windows, OS/2 (up to version 5.2), and Unix. Sun Microsystems bought StarOffice in August 1999 and subsequently opened up the source code to the community. The result was OpenOffice.org, now at version 1.1.4 for all available platforms – which include Windows, OS/2 (for a fee), and Freenix. OpenOffice.org includes a full-featured word processor, presentation-authoring tool, spreadsheet, and drawing tool. It is nearly 100% file-compatible with MS Office.

 

OpenOffice.org Writer

As an aside, StarOffice, now at version 7, is still available for Windows, GNU/Linux, and Solaris, for a suggested retail price of US$79.95. However, academic use is free except for shipping and handling. In addition, Sun also offers site licenses. Lastly, there’s an electronic download available for US$59.95. StarOffice has all the components of OpenOffice.org, and adds a simple database manager. The Sun FAQ claims that SO and OpenOffice.org share the same code.

The Mozilla suite includes a Web browser, chat client, newsgroup reader, POP/IMAP client, HTML composer, and the Jabberzilla multi-protocol IM client

Firefox is a child of the Mozilla project which also produced its bigger brother the Mozilla suite. The latter includes a Web browser, chat client, newsgroup reader, POP/IMAP client, HTML composer, and the Jabberzilla multi-protocol instant messaging (IM) client. Firefox is a stand-alone browser, now at version 1.0, available for the same platforms as Mozilla and OpenOffice.org. Like the advertising-sponsored Opera and the Mozilla browser, Firefox employs tabbed browsing. This means that you can browse several pages in different panes within the same window, and switch from one pane to another by clicking on the tabs at the top of the panes.

 

Firefox in full-screen mode. Note the tabs at the top of the viewing area

The most exciting feature for me is the use of the XML User-interface Language (XUL, pronounced zool to rhyme with ‘cool’) to create extensions, which as the name implies, extend the features of Firefox. The one I find most useful is WebmailCompose, which converts a mailto: link to a link to my selected Webmail account’s compose window. In other words, when I click on a mailto: link, a new tab opens up where I can compose a mail message from gmail. Also, here’s an interesting sample XUL application that should give you some idea of XUL’s capabilities. A real-world application is the Wizz RSS News Reader, which uses the sidebar as the control panel. I personally find XUL interesting because it looks to be one of the building blocks in creating a class of applications known as Rich Internet Applications (RIAs), which use the browser as a universal front end.

The Web server we know as Apache, officially the Apache HTTP server, is the most famous output of the Apache Software Foundation. Apache serves approximately 67% of the world’s websites. It is now at version 2, available both for Windows and free systems. A 2.1 version is, as of this writing, in beta.

Free desktop software on Windows can make sense, depending on the situation. However, I personally question the usefulness of running free server software on Windows. They run more efficiently on free systems, which in turn can run on older – and therefore, cheaper – hardware. I would only run a free server on Windows for experimention and education not for production.

Proprietary software on free systems

Vendors of proprietary software have made their products available on free systems for one reason or another. Oracle, for instance, saw GNU/Linux as an opportunity to expand their market. Some applications – Opera and VMWare, to name two – were available on free systems from the start, and it was natural for the latter.

Oracle created a stir in the industry when they announced the availability, sometime in 1998, of their database products on GNU/Linux. According to the Oracle-on-Linux FAQ, the following are the certified and supported distributions:

This is not to say that Oracle won’t run on other GNU/Linux distributions, or on the BSDs, just that Oracle can’t certify and support all of those systems.

The FAQ adds that “All key Oracle products including Oracle Database 10g with Real Application Clusters, Oracle Application Server 10g, Oracle Collaboration Suite, Oracle Developer Suite 10g, and Oracle E-Business Suite are available for Linux.” Those of you who run Oracle know the details of those products better than I do. Oracle distributes these in no-fee 650MByte .gz (gzip’ed) files. Those of you without the bandwidth can order a CD from Oracle for a minimal handling fee. Pricing takes effect only when you deploy a database, and starts at about US$49 per user, and moves into per-CPU rates depending on the application.

Oracle has the reputation for being the choice for enterprise-class databases. However, free RDBMSes are encroaching on this space. The two most popular ones are MySQL and PostgreSQL, both of which were mentioned earlier. As an aside, MySQL also has a paid-support license option which – need I remind you? – does not detract from its being free software.

VMWare is a software implementation of a virtual machine – i.e., it enables applications from other operating systems to run on the target machine. Thus, in MS Windows, VMWare will open up GNU/Linux as a task on your Windows desktop; on the other hand, VMWare will open up Windows as a task on your Freenix X desktop. And, once you have Windows-on-X, you can run most Windows applications. However, graphic-intensive games, such as Duke Nukem or Far Cry, will run far too slowly – if at all – to be playable. Feedback from users indicates that Microsoft Office will run under VMWare, albeit at a slight speed penalty.

Once you have Windows-on-X, you can run most Windows applications. However, graphic-intensive games will run far too slowly – if at all – to be playable

VMWare is available as a no-fee download in .tar.gz (tar’ed, then gzip’ed) format. You are free to try it out for 30 days, after which the program dies unless you purchase a license: the workstation edition is US$189 for electronic delivery, US$199 for packaged. Network licenses are also available, starting at US$1,694 for two CPUs.

VMWare’s web site

If the licensing fees are too steep for you, there are several free software options – wine(Wine is Not an Emulator) and bochs. The setup for these may not be as smooth as VMWare’s though. I, for one, never got my wine working on my FreeBSD box, although I admit that maybe I didn’t try hard enough, since it wasn’t a priority. On the other hand, it is free software.

Opera is a no-fee download, and you can continue using it for as long as you want, although you’ll have to put up with ads that take up the top portion of the task window. US$39 gets rid of those ads. Opera claims to be the “safest and fastest full-featured Web browser on the market.” People who have tried both Firefox and Opera confirm that Opera is faster. However, the consensus was that Firefox adhered more closely to W3C standards than Opera. Besides, Firefox is free software, whereas Opera’s source isn’t even available to begin with.

Other proprietary software available on Freenix are Sun’s StarOffice, Sun’s Java, and IBM’s Websphere. Take note that, while Sun does make the source to Java available, you aren’t free to modify it. As to IBM’s Websphere, it’s a no-fee download like Oracle, and then you pay for deployment.

Opera’s web site

Conclusion

So, if you’re stuck in a proprietary system, don’t despair: you’re still invited to the free software party because there are ports of free software. Conversely, if you’re already enjoying free software bliss at the operating system level, don’t knock proprietary software.

[May 5, 2005] Why the third world won’t save open source Between the Lines ZDNet.com

The primary barrier to Linux growth is the cost of moving from a Windows ecosystem to a Linux ecosystem. Developing nations, however, have less existing IT infrastructure. Much as African nations are bypassing wired telecommunications and moving straight to wireless, why can’t developing nations bypass the Windows standard and grow a Linux ecosystem?

First, don’t underestimate the installed IT base present in developing nations. Nations such as Brazil aren’t Zaire. Per capita GDP in Brazil is six times that of China, and over half of the Czech Republic. The IT base in most nations isn’t exactly a tabula rasa, and any large organization will have already built up credible amounts of IT infrastructure.

Second, consider why English is the de facto language of business. Given the need to communicate in business situations, people naturally gravitate towards one language, and for historical reasons, that language is English. It doesn’t matter whether an economy newly integrated into the global marketplace has less of a track record of using English. They will use English in business situations, because that’s what the wider business world is using.

The same principle applies in computer technology. Asians outnumber Westerners by a factor of 4 to 1. Still, the West will remain a critical market for the forseeable future, and having systems that integrate seamlessly with, and can consume products created by, Western corporations will continue to be important. That means Asian IT infrastructure is likely to mirror Western IT infrastructure.

Some think that third world nations’ enthusiasm for open source, driven in part by a desire to replace IT imports with domestic product (a form of IT industrial policy), will change the equation and pull the Western world into open source nirvana. Unfortunately, such industrial policies don’t have a great track record of success.

Dana Blankenhorn wondered aloud in a recent blog post whether Brazil’s commitment to open source might "jump-start profitable businesses." He also noted, interestingly enough, the disastrous consequences of Brazil’s last industrial scheme:

In the 1980s the country instituted a market reserve policy aimed at limiting PC imports. This proved disastrous. The country missed 15 years of progress.

The goal, of course, was to replace PC imports with domestically created product. Unfortunately, hiding domestic companies from foreign competition merely makes weak domestic companies that can’t survive without government preferences. I don’t see why replacing the last system of preferences with a new system of preferences will fare any better

The open source community can’t look to the developing world as the tugboat that drags the developed world into the Linux port. They will need to figure out a way to convince the developed world to adopt Linux. In my entirely fallible opinion, the only way to do that is to lower the cost of shifting to Linux, and that’s going to depend on making it easy for Windows developers to move into open source. If the open source community doesn’t want to do that, then Windows developers aren’t going to move, and that means the people who use their products will stay put, too.

Etc

Society

Groupthink : Two Party System as Polyarchy : Corruption of Regulators : Bureaucracies : Understanding Micromanagers and Control Freaks : Toxic Managers :   Harvard Mafia : Diplomatic Communication : Surviving a Bad Performance Review : Insufficient Retirement Funds as Immanent Problem of Neoliberal Regime : PseudoScience : Who Rules America : Neoliberalism  : The Iron Law of Oligarchy : Libertarian Philosophy

Quotes

War and Peace : Skeptical Finance : John Kenneth Galbraith :Talleyrand : Oscar Wilde : Otto Von Bismarck : Keynes : George Carlin : Skeptics : Propaganda  : SE quotes : Language Design and Programming Quotes : Random IT-related quotes :  Somerset Maugham : Marcus Aurelius : Kurt Vonnegut : Eric Hoffer : Winston Churchill : Napoleon Bonaparte : Ambrose Bierce :  Bernard Shaw : Mark Twain Quotes

Bulletin:

Vol 25, No.12 (December, 2013) Rational Fools vs. Efficient Crooks The efficient markets hypothesis : Political Skeptic Bulletin, 2013 : Unemployment Bulletin, 2010 :  Vol 23, No.10 (October, 2011) An observation about corporate security departments : Slightly Skeptical Euromaydan Chronicles, June 2014 : Greenspan legacy bulletin, 2008 : Vol 25, No.10 (October, 2013) Cryptolocker Trojan (Win32/Crilock.A) : Vol 25, No.08 (August, 2013) Cloud providers as intelligence collection hubs : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2010 : Inequality Bulletin, 2009 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2008 : Copyleft Problems Bulletin, 2004 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2011 : Energy Bulletin, 2010 : Malware Protection Bulletin, 2010 : Vol 26, No.1 (January, 2013) Object-Oriented Cult : Political Skeptic Bulletin, 2011 : Vol 23, No.11 (November, 2011) Softpanorama classification of sysadmin horror stories : Vol 25, No.05 (May, 2013) Corporate bullshit as a communication method  : Vol 25, No.06 (June, 2013) A Note on the Relationship of Brooks Law and Conway Law

History:

Fifty glorious years (1950-2000): the triumph of the US computer engineering : Donald Knuth : TAoCP and its Influence of Computer Science : Richard Stallman : Linus Torvalds  : Larry Wall  : John K. Ousterhout : CTSS : Multix OS Unix History : Unix shell history : VI editor : History of pipes concept : Solaris : MS DOS :  Programming Languages History : PL/1 : Simula 67 : C : History of GCC development :  Scripting Languages : Perl history   : OS History : Mail : DNS : SSH : CPU Instruction Sets : SPARC systems 1987-2006 : Norton Commander : Norton Utilities : Norton Ghost : Frontpage history : Malware Defense History : GNU Screen : OSS early history

Classic books:

The Peter Principle : Parkinson Law : 1984 : The Mythical Man-Month :  How to Solve It by George Polya : The Art of Computer Programming : The Elements of Programming Style : The Unix Hater’s Handbook : The Jargon file : The True Believer : Programming Pearls : The Good Soldier Svejk : The Power Elite

Most popular humor pages:

Manifest of the Softpanorama IT Slacker Society : Ten Commandments of the IT Slackers Society : Computer Humor Collection : BSD Logo Story : The Cuckoo's Egg : IT Slang : C++ Humor : ARE YOU A BBS ADDICT? : The Perl Purity Test : Object oriented programmers of all nations : Financial Humor : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2008 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2010 : The Most Comprehensive Collection of Editor-related Humor : Programming Language Humor : Goldman Sachs related humor : Greenspan humor : C Humor : Scripting Humor : Real Programmers Humor : Web Humor : GPL-related Humor : OFM Humor : Politically Incorrect Humor : IDS Humor : "Linux Sucks" Humor : Russian Musical Humor : Best Russian Programmer Humor : Microsoft plans to buy Catholic Church : Richard Stallman Related Humor : Admin Humor : Perl-related Humor : Linus Torvalds Related humor : PseudoScience Related Humor : Networking Humor : Shell Humor : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2011 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2012 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2013 : Java Humor : Software Engineering Humor : Sun Solaris Related Humor : Education Humor : IBM Humor : Assembler-related Humor : VIM Humor : Computer Viruses Humor : Bright tomorrow is rescheduled to a day after tomorrow : Classic Computer Humor

The Last but not Least Technology is dominated by two types of people: those who understand what they do not manage and those who manage what they do not understand ~Archibald Putt. Ph.D

Copyright © 1996-2021 by Softpanorama Society. www.softpanorama.org was initially created as a service to the (now defunct) UN Sustainable Development Networking Programme (SDNP) without any remuneration. This document is an industrial compilation designed and created exclusively for educational use and is distributed under the Softpanorama Content License. Original materials copyright belong to respective owners. Quotes are made for educational purposes only in compliance with the fair use doctrine.

FAIR USE NOTICE This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to advance understanding of computer science, IT technology, economic, scientific, and social issues. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided by section 107 of the US Copyright Law according to which such material can be distributed without profit exclusively for research and educational purposes.

This is a Spartan WHYFF (We Help You For Free) site written by people for whom English is not a native language. Grammar and spelling errors should be expected. The site contain some broken links as it develops like a living tree...

 You can use PayPal to to buy a cup of coffee for authors of this site

Disclaimer:

The statements, views and opinions presented on this web page are those of the author (or referenced source) and are not endorsed by, nor do they necessarily reflect, the opinions of the Softpanorama society. We do not warrant the correctness of the information provided or its fitness for any purpose. The site uses AdSense so you need to be aware of Google privacy policy. You you do not want to be tracked by Google please disable Javascript for this site. This site is perfectly usable without Javascript.

Last modified: March 12, 2019