Why open clouds are more important than open phones
Ars Technica's Ryan Paul wants to know, "Can a [truly open smartphone] be done?" But the real question is, "Should we care?"
Hello? Can I get some freedom around here?
Hence, Bradley Kuhn of the Software Freedom Law Center expresses anxiety about the future of freedom in mobile...
We are in a very precarious time with regard to the freedom of mobile devices. We currently have no truly Free Software operating system that does the job.
...when he really should be concerned with choice in mobile. Right now, we're spoiled for choice in mobile, what with Apple's iPhone, Google Android, Symbian, LiMo, Moblin, etc., which suggests that users are free to move between devices.
In this case, it's not the license that makes users free. It's the market.
Open-source software plays an important role in ensuring user choice, but it's not the sum total of the freedom/choice equation. It's just one factor. As Tim O'Reilly reminds us, it's not even necessarily the most important factor, either.
Kuhn and other free-software advocates worry that the nuts and bolts making up the software on mobile phones be free, but this is surprising given the increasing irrelevance of single-node freedom when it's tied into a network. This is what I've described as "the Hotel California of tech," and it suggests we should be far more concerned with freedom between nodes than freedom of the nodes themselves.
In other words, the real concern should be over open data, not open phones. No matter how open my phone's software may be, it's meaningless if I can't move my data between devices or wireless providers.
Even here, there's cause for hope. For example, Funambol's open-source mobile cloud synchronization and push e-mail software is in use by 10 of the leading mobile service providers, as identified in a new report, which arguably should be more relevant to the Freedom fighters than whether Bluetooth is open source.
Glyn Moody, a journalist with strong free-software leanings, understands this. That's why he makes the case for an open cloud, and not simply "open node in the cloud":
Ideally, what we need is a completely open source cloud computing infrastructure on which applications providing people with things like (doubly) free email and word processing services could be offered....The trick here is not to fight the battle on the opponents' terms, but to come up with something completely different.
For example, how about creating an open source, *distributed* cloud? By downloading and running some free code on your computer, you could contribute processing power and disc space that collectively creates a global, distributed cloud computing system. You would benefit by being able to use services that run on it, and at the same time you would help to sustain the entire open source cloud ecosystem in a scalable fashion.
One can quibble with the feasibility of this approach, but at least Moody is thinking at the right scale. Those who are still stuck in the Open Source 1.0 of isolated, client-side software are not.
I suppose someone has to fixate on upper-case Freedom above all other priorities. Like usability. Or ubiquity. Or...well, anything.
But most of us don't think this way, because the world is a lot more complicated than Freedom on one hand, and Slavery on the other. Also, the focus of freedom has evolved in our networked world, though some free-software advocates seem mired in Freedom 1.0.
It's time to upgrade. Freedom is more than a license. It derives from a competitive market, one that is assisted by open source but not exclusively or even primarily defined by it.
Matt Asay brings a decade of in-the-trenches open-source business and legal experience to The Open Road, with an emphasis on emerging open-source business strategies and opportunities. Matt is vice president of business development at Alfresco, a company that develops open-source software for content management. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network and is not an employee of CNET. Disclosure. You can follow Matt on Twitter @mjasay. 
Native apps run better and do more than the cloud. Does Asay really know anything , or get paid by Apple to put out such drivel ?
Possibly an android of some sort :)
LOL
well said sir, well said indeed
+1
you're a friggin sellout, so sorry that apple abuses you and won't open up the iPhone.
-Aaron
historically written and spoken *much* more about software freedom in the
"Cloud" than I have about freedom in mobile space. In fact, I and my
colleagues at autonomo.us were well along looking at the issue of "Freedom
2.0" long before we started dealing with the freedom issues in the mobile
phone space.</p>
<p>Indeed, for my part, my blog post you quote is <strong>exactly</strong>
the first time I've talked publicly about software freedom on mobile phone
platforms. Meanwhile, if you had done any research, you'd have found me
speaking and writing about freedom in the Cloud going back to at least
November 2007 (and even further if you consider the work I did with Henry
Poole and Eben Moglen on the AGPLv1 in early 2002).
On the speaking side, in the last year, I spoke about this issue <a
href="http://plone.org/events/conferences/2008-washington-dc/agenda/schedule/day-1">at
the Plone conference</a>, <a
href="http://www.softwarefreedom.org/podcast/2008/dec/23/0x03/">on SFLC's
podcast</a>, and <a
href="http://www.socallinuxexpo.org/scale7x/conference-info/bradley-kuhn">at
SCALE 7x</a>. Indeed, the SCALE 7x talk <a
href="http://arstechnica.com/open-source/news/2009/02/ars-at-scale-sflc-tech-director-wants-to-liberate-the-cloud.ars">was
covered in the press by the very same reporter</a> who wrote the article
that you used as the basis of your recent blog post.
<p>Meanwhile, I've also written about the issue in my blog regularly since
November 2007, which is also mirrored on SFLC's blog . Here's a list of
URLs:</p>
http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2008/07/03/microblog-freedom-inside.html
http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2007/11/21/stet-and-agplv3.html
http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2008/07/14/autonomo-us-launch.html
http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2008/07/23/agplv3-hosting.html
http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2008/12/01/agpl-dfsg-free.html
http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2009/01/15/launchpad-agplv3.html
</p>
<p>And that's just what <strong>I</strong> personally have written and
spoken. Next, consider the fact that my colleagues over at <a
href="http://autonomo.us/">autonomo.us</a> are also writing and talking
about it even more than I am. In particular, Evan Prodromou won a
Google/O'Reilly Open Source award this year for working on this very
issue!</p>
<p>So, how does a single post about mobile phone freedom yield your
assessment that the software freedom advocates are focused on the mobile
phone issue and ignoring the network service freedom issue? In fact, I
think the network service freedom issue is indeed more important, and
the volume comparison of my public talks and writings show it!</p>
<p>Matt, I also note that this is the second time you've purposely avoided
mentioning that many software freedom advocates are talking about
freedom issues in the Cloud (the previous time was on 15 May 2009). I
wrote to you then to raise it, and you ignored my email. I must now
believe you are ignoring our statements about software freedom in the
Cloud on purpose, although I cannot determine your exact reason for
doing so. As a quasi-journalist, don't you want to communicate what's
really being said?</p>
These responses from the "walled garden" called Apple is EXACTLY why iPhone will succumb to Android , just as Mac OS fell out of favor and Microsoft Windows now dominates.
Apple suffers from what is called "The Innovator`s Dilemma"
It happens in every industry. The innovator does not win in the end...it`s a FACT.
Much as I follow your work - this is wide off the mark - both for Mobile and for Cloud. I am amazed how someone like you can confuse Open source with Open data .. in the sense that you can build a perfectly closed data system based on open source. the sad fact is - the cloud commoditises open source .. no one REALLY cares what the service runs on .. and thats the real issue for Stallman(and even Ellison since it also commoditoses databases). You follow the same flawed logic to mobile phones .. and come to the same erronous conclusions. And re ..
>>>
Right now, we're spoiled for choice in mobile, what with Apple's iPhone, Google Android, Symbian, LiMo, Moblin, etc., which suggests that users are free to move between devices.
<<<
I have yet to see a user go from iPhone to Symbian purely because it is open source .. (as other comments have pointed out)
Much as I value open source, articles like these beg to be challenged due to their intellectual flaws. If I have time, I may do a post on www.opengardensblog.futuretext.com kind rgds Ajit
Apple says "NO"
Finally someone gets it.
This isn't about brand loyalty all you iPhone haters. It's not even about platform but about data wanting to be free and it is by definition. It's about net neutrality. It is about a standard to access that data on any platform, from any location.
I don't need no stinking service to access my data. I don't need Apple to create an app for that, I don't need Microsoft to tell me it Plays for Sure.
The web created an explosion of the cloud but its inherent freedom needs to be crushed if you ask the powers that be. It "needs" to be monetized which means restricting your access to data, yours or public.
Back in the early 80's we used to talk about this in more generic terms, predicting the future. It's wasn't about who made the best hardware but how you would have access to data at the push of a button.
The author makes a valid point. Platform doesn't matter. Access to your information does.
-- Finally someone gets it. Platform doesn't matter. Access to your information does.
You point out to the right issue(data portability) but it has nothing to do with Open source .. as I said before ... thats why the article is so flawed ..
It muddles cause and effect .. Consider ERP systems .. you can port data from Oracle to SAP(and many did in the pre Y2K days). Both were not 'open source' - the issue is irrelevent .. same with cloud .. it does not matter what the development platform is .. open source or not .. anyway .. if i have time, I will blog about it .. but I believe many open source people dont agree to the Cloud philosophy since it commoditises them. Admittedly, there are issues .. data portability, privacy etc .. but these have nothing to do with open source .. And then by adding mobile to it .. the article hopes that it will create something more insightflu(by ani iphone) which only serves to complicate it intellectually kind rgds Ajit
1- I should be able to sign up on a network of my choice without being exclusively linked to it by the phone manufacturer through exclusivity or through carrier contracts and cell phone locks.
2- I should be able to use any and all cell towers without worrying about roaming charges or limited services.
3- I should have access to all data on the phone in whichever means I like and do with them whatever I like.
4- I shouldn't need to pay extra to be able to remotely wipe my phone incase it is stolen or lost. (for example mobileme for the iphone)
5- I should have unrestricted access to public data available through out the cyberspace.
6-I should be able to easily transfer data from/to other phones without having to rely on the carriers to do them for me.
7-I should be able to easily restrict people from calling me, or report a caller for harassing calls (marketing calls)
8- Individuals should be able to block their numbers from being shown to the people they're calling, yet businesses shouldn't be able to spoof phone numbers or block their own, since they don't benefit from it unless they are doing something that wont be traced back to them (hence illegal or a spam of some sort).
Not sure if the "open clouds" is the solution to address all those issues, but does it really matter to the John Doe consumer? All I can see from my side is that all that's required is just standardization of protocols of some kind (dont take the word protocol to its technical definition, I just couldn't think of a better word).
- by AjitJaokar October 29, 2009 3:17 AM PDT
- dj_hash ..
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
(18 Comments)absolutely ... spot on .. somethingI have covered on the OpenGardens blog for a while .. but qs is - Is any of this dependent on Open source? On any environment .. including mobile .. the open data system can be implemented (or not) irrespective of open source .. which is my point .. and which this article misses rgds Ajit