Reaction: Google Docs

As I’ve seen it, Google Docs is an online office suite which allows users to create, edit and store documents, spreadsheets and presentation online. It allows users to work collaboratively because documents can be shared, opened and edited by multiple users. And once a document is edited, the users will be notified. Documents are saved to Google’s server to prevent data loss and they also keep track of past edits of a specific document. It can be used by anyone for free. And because it is also a storage, 1GB storage is given for the users for free but additional storage space will cost money.

Google Docs for me is a good thing especially for those who still don’t have an office suite such as those from Microsoft, OpenOffice etc. They can now just use Google Docs for office suite-type of activity and also because storage will come in handy. Users don’t need to save it in a storage device such as flash drives because Google Docs will just save it to their server and they will also keep track of your edits. It is indeed a helpful because you don’t need to install an office suite software because all you need is a browser and an internet connection and instantly, you will have and office suite and a storage media at the same.

However, I don’t think confidential documents for organizations or businesses should be done in Google Docs. Google Docs allow user to work collaboratively which will make the document exposed to all the users. If such confidential documents will be available to the public then it might cause trouble to its original user.

Generally, Google Docs is helpful to a lot of people because though it is free, it gives users all the service that we could get from a traditional office suite. Though I mentioned that confidential documents must not be done in there, collaborative working is not a bad idea after all because it will help us have a better document with the help of other users.

Realizaton: Monday's Discussion (07-04-2011)

                The discussion we had during our class in Open Source Technology last Monday, July 4, 2011 was really interesting. We had some kind of brainstorming or sharing ideas with everybody. Through different ideas that we share to each other, we come to see the different side of every issues regarding open source. We talked about software quality over licensing issues, openoffice over Microsoft office and Windows OS over Linux etc. Though some of us have different side on every issue we tackled, we got one thing for ourselves. As my realization, I think open source is really something worth trying not just because it’s free but because they really offer high-quality software. Though I might say that most of the computer users nowadays including me use Microsoft softwares and all its licensed softwares, I think that open source is really something that could compete with Microsoft in coming years. I think there might stand a chance that we, users will be release from those intellectual property rights of licensed softwares by Microsoft. Open source is making a name for itself; it is fast rising itself to recognition or fame to the public especially to the computer enthusiasts. I said all of that because during our discussion last Monday I noticed that most of the groups that discussed in front of the class are more favorable to the idea of open source. Most of us come to pick open source and other stuff rather than the usual softwares that we use. Though free is good, I just come to think that if softwares will be open source or if most of the softwares will be free, what will happen to the programmers and developers? How will they earn more money than those developers from licensed softwares. But generally, there is still a lot to learn from open source, we just still have to explore.

Reaction Paper: Revolution OS

            The documentary is about the history of GNU, Linux, and the open source and free software movements. It features different people concerning Gnu, Linux, Open Source and Free Software Movements like Richard Stallman, Michael Tiemann, Linus Torvalds, Larry Augustin, Eric S. Raymond, Bruce Perens, Frank Hecker and Brian Behlendorf. They all become a part of what we had right now especially in Open Source technology.

            Based on the documentary, Open Source is  a way for people to collaborate on software without having problems with intellectual property, having to negotiate contracts every time you buy a piece of software, have a lot of lawyers involved. In general, Open Source wants to make the software to work, and to be able to have people to contribute fixes to that software, so they sort of sacrifice the intellectual property rights and just let the whole world use the software.

Upon watching the documentary, I think it’s easy to notice that the guy named Richard Stallman is quite a good guy. He is the guy who wants to have changes in the software industry that is being run by large proprietors. Richard Stallman I think is against the idea of intellectual property rights. He said that during their time if people want to use a pc you need an operating system, and large proprietor of operating system by that time didn’t share it with other people, instead they try to control the users, dominate the users, and restrict them. They told users that if he/she wants to get to get the system, he/she needs to sign a promise that he/she won’t share it with nobody else. And for Richard Stallman that was essentially a promise to be a bad person, to betray the rest of the world, cut himself off from society from a cooperating community, he felt that, that is wrong. He felt hostility about the idea of intellectual property. He felt that there has been a moral dilemma going on in the industry. And because of that he founded the Free Software Foundation.

I think Richard Stallman is right about his thoughts. With that intellectual property rights, proprietors will have the ability to control the people buying those systems. I think once a buyer gets the item that he wants; he has the decision on whether to keep it to himself or to share it with others. I do believe that Stallman is right because without the intellectual property rights computer users will have the freedom to form a community where in everybody can help on another to develop or enhance a software that will suit every computer users need which will be beneficial to everyone.

Since Stallman himself is an operating system developer, he decided to develop an operating system that would be available to all computer users and are allowed to share to everyone. In that case they use the idea of copyleft. Copyleft is the one where authors give permission to copy, to change some but when you distribute it, it has to be under the terms so whoever you shared it with also gets the freedom to cooperate with other people if he wants to. With that Microsoft Windows find themselves a pretty decent competition with GNU.

I honestly believe that Stallman is indeed a man of good character. With his talents he could be anything he wants himself to be in the software business. He could earn a lot of money with his talents without thinking about others. Instead he think about the community and how people can help each other in order to create a better computer community. He is a good man.