James Luedke

Prof. Sherri Harvey

English 1A

24 May 2004

GNU and Open Source Software: Building Better Tools for a Better Tomorrow

Imagine that it is a sunny Saturday morning, and you are anxious to get started on building a birdhouse for your dear old grandmother's birthday. You then go to the hardware store to buy your supplies. However, upon bringing up the Acme-brand hammer to the counter, the cashier then presents to you a lengthy 20-page agreement that you are obligated to sign if you wish to use the Acme hammer. You are told that you may only use Acme nails with the hammer, you may only build Acme-sanctioned birdhouses, and under no condition may you ever lend the Acme hammer to someone else for building a birdhouse. Violating this agreement is punishable by heavy fines and/or imprisonment. Building a birdhouse for granny just got much more complicated. As any craftsman will testify, having the ability to use high-quality tools is necessary to get the job done.

This can also be said for the invisible tools that build the framework of our society. Technology has been the defining tool of recent times, and the advent of computers in the last 50 years has had monumental impacts on every aspect of life, ranging from entertainment to education to social order. However, with capitalism as a dominant ideology of modern times, businesses are hungrily scouring for markets to control and profit from. Greedy investors began to see great potential in the creative inventors typing up new programs on homemade computers in their garages. The computer industry has quickly become one of the largest and most profitable markets in the world. Software is the most important “tool within a tool”, possessing the ability to command hardware to perform an infinite number of possibilities. However, the industry's financial success has not been possible without the corruption of the initial “open source” philosophy which inspired programmers to develop new products. In its purest form, open source software is about the free exchange of technological ideas, with software programmers sharing their code in order to make new options and solutions that work for specific problems (Revolution OS). After all, tools are used for building and improving structures. Unfortunately, intervention from the corporate sector has resulted in proprietary software, “owned” software that orders restrictions which have seriously obstructed this original idea. However, there are a growing number of inspired individuals and organizations who are fighting to protect the integrity of technological freedom. A key contender has been the GNU and open source software movement. GNU and open source software provides computer users with the freedom and flexibility to use tools to collaboratively develop, improve, and distribute better technology for society as a whole, without the limiting restrictions of proprietary software.

In a world not too long ago, before the rule of proprietary software like Windows, all software was, in essence, open source. All software is made up of source code, ranging from a few to thousands of lines of commands written by programmers which instruct the computer to carry out different functions. Open source software is software written by programmers who freely distribute their source code for anyone to review and modify. When software was an infant technology, computer programmers were forced to have a very tight-knit community (Williams 13). The lack of reliable hardware and software forced programmers to stay in constant contact with one another. Computer programs, as well as the source code which was used to makes these programs, were distributed openly and freely. In fact, in their earliest days, computers themselves didn't even have passwords (Revolution OS). But as time passed, businesses and governments had a growing investment in the technology, and developers were pressured to close the doors on their source code. Suddenly software became a valuable asset, and there was an increasing need to keep source code secret. The general fear was that if you released your source code, a competitor could make modifications to the code and re-sell it as their own (Revolution OS). This was not an attractive idea for investors who had put hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars into the development of that software.

In 1976, Bill Gates, founder of Microsoft, a then unknown software start-up, feared the implications of accessible source code. Gates voiced this frustration publicly when he wrote a charged essay entitled “An Open Letter to Hobbyists”. The article was about a new program Microsoft had recently released named Altair BASIC. In the article Gates poses 2 observations:

1) Most of these "users" never bought BASIC (less than 10% of all Altair owners have bought BASIC) 
2) The amount of royalties we have received from sales to hobbyists makes the time spent on Altair BASIC worth less than $2 an hour.  (“An Open Letter to Hobbyists”)

These observations pointed out an obvious problem with the software market at that time. Businesses were afraid to invest in software companies as they had yet to make anyone serious money. Many feel this article gave birth to the proprietary software movement. Proprietary software is software that is sold for profit, with the purchaser being forced to sign an agreement that they will not share the software with anyone. Also, proprietary software does not release any of their source code to the public (Revolution OS). This forces users to adhere to the will of the software manufacturer, as they do not have the freedom to make changes to the way the software application operates. At the time, this was a new concept to the computer community. Up until now, software was openly and freely passed around, without the concept of ownership. This view troubled Gates. He felt that it hindered the production of good software “What hobbyist can put 3-man years into programming, finding all bugs, documenting his product and distribute for free?” (“An Open Letter to Hobbyists”) Little did he know, there were many out there that were more than willing to do just that.

Richard Stallman was one of the world's first true “hackers”. As a young man, Stallman graduated from Harvard in 1974 with a BA in physics (Williams 35). During his time in college, he had a growing interest in computers, which soon became a life-long passion. After his time at Harvard, Stallman took a research staff position at the MIT Artificial Intelligence lab. Stallman thrived off of the computer community, spending nearly all his time at the lab. For several months he even lived there (Williams 49). Stallman had a growing concern about the direction of the computer software community. As time passed, more and more software was becoming proprietary. Stallman himself was soon to become a victim of the limiting nature of proprietary software. During his presentations, he often describes an incident he had with a Xerox printer at the MIT lab. The printer was always giving people at the lab problems. Being a skilled programmer, he sought out to find the source code that drove the printer, in order to fix it. When he contacted the manufacturer, he found that one of his colleagues had previously worked for them. When Stallman asked him for a copy of the software's source code, he was shocked to be rejected. He informed Stallman that he had promised not to give a copy of the software to anyone (Williams 10). This was Stallman's first experience with a non-disclosure agreement, and it left him furious. Without the source code, he was completely helpless in fixing the problem, thus being reliant on the whim of the software company. As he recalls, “I was so angry I couldn't think of a way to express it. So I just turned away and walked out without another word.” (qtd. in Williams 10) Up until now, Stallman had been concerned about proprietary software and its effects on the community, but for the most part, he was an impartial observer. However, this was different. This had directly affected his ability to use computers freely and creatively, as had been the spirit of computing in its earlier days. He now felt obligated to take action.

In September of 1983, Stallman started the Free Software Foundation (FSF), which gave birth to the GNU project. GNU stands for “GNU's Not Unix”, which is a humorous title that reflects the free spirit of Stallman (GNU Operating System). The GNU project was started to develop a complete UNIX-style operating system which was comprised entirely of free software. The driving force behind GNU is the GPL (GNU's General Public License). This license was specifically created in order to combat proprietary software, while also protecting the integrity of the program's author. The license states that anyone is allowed to freely copy, distribute, and modify the source code, as long as any derived versions carry the same copyright protections as the original version (GNU Operating System). This license gives software developers the freedom to download a program and modify it to suite their needs and solve their problems, which offers a major advantage over proprietary software. As both the open and “closed” source movements gained momentum, and computers began playing a major role in every aspect of society, many were beginning to see that having this liberty was beneficial to a variety of interests, ranging from personal to educational to entrepreneurial. The idea of the GPL was catching on, and the open source movement needed a legitimate alternative to present to the mainstream. They would find it in Linux. The most popular software package that carries the GPL is the Linux kernel, which has revolutionized the world of computing and brought open source software to the masses (Revolution OS).

In 1991, Linus Torvald's released version 0.01 of the Linux kernel was about 10,000 lines of code and had about 100 users (Revolution OS). A kernel is an integral part of a computer operating system that allocates different resources that programs require to run. By itself, Linux is useless; however, when it was combined with the various programs that the GNU project had previously released, it created the GNU/Linux operating system. For the first time, computer users had a completely free alternative to proprietary operating systems such as SunOS, Macintosh, and most significantly, Microsoft Windows. By this time, Windows was becoming the undisputed emperor of the operating system. Although Linux was an option, it was initially slow to catch on. Most large companies looked at free software as a joke. However, more and more inspired and talented individuals started contributing to the GNU/Linux operating system, having previously experienced the frustrating limitations of proprietary operating systems. In 1993, version 0.99 of the Linux Kernel was released with 100,000 lines of code and an estimated 20,000 users (Revolution OS). The growth of Linux users would continue to an estimated number of 18 million users worldwide, as the first Killer App. for Linux was developed (Linux Counter).

A Killer App. is a term used in the computer industry to define a piece of software that completely revolutionizes the software market, and the Apache Server, running on Linux, would do just that. In late April of 1995, the Apache webserver had its first public release (The Apache Software Foundation). A webserver is a program that runs on a computer generally connected to the Internet, and answers requests via URL for web pages. Basically, no one would be able to access webpages on the Internet without it. There were several other webservers on the market at this time; however, they were all proprietary software, and had very high costs associated with them. They all required expensive hardware, or as in the case of Microsoft's IIS webserver, even demanded an entire computer for every domain (Revolution OS). The corporate world, which was now eagerly anticipating the exponential growth possibilities of the Internet, quickly sought out cost-effective options, and would eventually give up its skepticism to invest in open source software. The Apache webserver was very appealing, as it ran seamlessly on the GNU/Linux operating system, which was fast and highly reliable. For the first time, there was an indisputable advantage to running free software, and the cost difference was monumental. The corporate world now started to look at free software very seriously. Today, Apache is the dominant webserver in use on the Internet. It hosts 67% of all websites, and its closest competition is Microsoft IIS, with 21% of the market (Netcraft Webserver Archive). This fact alone proves that free software has had a dramatic impact on the growth of the Internet. More and more companies were now beginning to wonder; Just how could open source programs could be successful, reliable, and in most cases better than competitive proprietary software?

The freedom and accessibility that comes with open source software is precisely what makes it such a good product, in spite of the whining cries from behind closed doors like Microsoft. One of the reasons GNU and open source movements have been highly successful is due largely to the benefits of peer-review; when a piece of software is released, you invite the public to view line-by-line what is happening in your programming. This allows hundreds or even thousands of other programmers to review what your program is doing and offer their professional opinion. In turn, they may be able to use parts of the code for their own programming, thus perpetuating a symbiotic cycle of contribution and shared improvement. On the other hand, proprietary software is written by a small group of professionals, generally with one primary developer in charge of the project. Hiring software developers is an extremely expensive task. For example, to hire a team of 200 programmers for a year would cost close to 2 million dollars. In contrast, the Linux kernel team is maintained by thousands of users all over the world who are motivated to work on the project not based solely on the desire for salary, but for the numerous benefits of intellectual collectivity. Eric S. Raymond, in his famous essay “The Cathedral and the Bazaar”, discusses this issue in detail. He ends his argument with this thought; “The closed-source world can not win an evolutionary arms race with the open-source communities that can put in orders of magnitude more skilled time into a problem” (Raymond 54). This is the single greatest argument that open source software has in its favor, and what makes it such a high-quality product.

The fact that open source is peer-reviewed has more implications than just writing dependable and reliable software. It ensures that whatever decision is made is for the best of the community. This is increasingly important because of the strangle-hold Microsoft has on the desktop software industry. With over 90% of all desktop computers running Microsoft Windows, it would be very easy for the software giant to manipulate the community standards, such as protocols and file types to gain a complete monopoly on the market (Google Press Center). For example, in 199? Microsoft started to give away Internet Explorer, the Microsoft web browser, for free. However, they kept their source closed. This was a strategic move made by Microsoft to drive other web browser products out of the market. This created a major panic at Microsoft's competitor, Netscape. According to Eric Raymond,

They feared Microsoft would achieve a monopoly lock on the browser market, and they would then use that monopoly lock to pervert the HTTP and HTML standards that the web depends on. And once they turned those standards into lock-in devices, they could then use that control to drive Netscape out of the server market, which is where they were making their money. (qtd. in Revolution OS )

In response, seeing as how there was no way to compete in the market, Netscape eventually made the bold decision in 1998 to make their browser open source in order to protect the community from Microsoft's monopolization of the Internet (The Mozilla.org Mission). Greater numbers are beginning to recognize the validity of an open source community, as an increasing number of contributions provide useful alternatives to the present monopoly, as well as increase the quality of software in general.

The GNU and Open Source software movements are the only hope we have in keeping technology free and fair. They directly challenge large companies like Microsoft from obtaining a complete monopoly over the technology sector. This is very important, as it is part of an ongoing struggle against corporate control and monopolization. True democracy is about giving people within a society the power, as well as the tools, to defend their basic rights and let their voices be heard. As technology continues to grow and revolutionize the way we communicate and interact, it is crucial that people advocate for technological democracy. It is important for people to have freedom of choice, and free software empowers people with the tools to execute that freedom. We all know that having restrictions and limitations on a hammer is silly, so why should technology be treated differently than any other tool? Since the days of early humans using crude rock instruments, tools have been integral to the advancement and ingenuity of human civilization. Imagine where humanity would be if the caveman had been given restrictions on how he could use his rock. The rock may have never evolved into the hammer. Limiting our ability to use tools limits the potential of the human mind.