Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
GNU is Not Unix Software Linux

Vietnam Going Open Source 617

Posted by michael from the seeing-the-light dept.
An anonymous reader writes "Great article today on SiliconValley.com about Vietnam's solution to software piracy: eliminate Microsoft. Government tech officials are promoting a plan that would require all state-owned companies and government ministries to use open source by 2005. And they would require all computers assembled in Vietnam to be sold with open-source products installed on them."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Vietnam Going Open Source More

Vietnam Going Open Source

Comments Filter:

  • OB Vietnam quote (Score:5, Funny)

    by Hieronymus Howard ( 215725 ) * on Thursday October 30, 2003 @01:13PM (#7348782)
    I love the smell of Linux in the morning. Smells... like victory.

    Lieutenant Torvalds in Apocalypse .Net

    • Re:OB Vietnam quote (Score:4, Funny)

      by wfmcwalter ( 124904 ) on Thursday October 30, 2003 @01:17PM (#7348834) Homepage
      Novel. I was expecting a "charlie don't websurf", but it's all good.
    • Horror, the horror.

      Colonel Gates in Apocalypse .Net


    • "Me love you long time."

      (Mod me -1 Troll!)
  • ...can be found on the AsiaOSC Vietnam page [asiaosc.org].

    There's a interesting presentation [sourceforge.net] linked to from there also.

  • This would completely eliminate government piracy (Score:5, Insightful)

    by onyxruby ( 118189 ) <onyxruby&comcast,net> on Thursday October 30, 2003 @01:14PM (#7348793)
    This would completely eliminate government agency piracy in Vietnam, so why do I get the feeling the BSA's equivalent in Asia isn't going to be very happy about this?

  • I love the smell of GNUpalm in the morning. . . (Score:5, Funny)

    by Limburgher ( 523006 ) on Thursday October 30, 2003 @01:14PM (#7348796) Homepage Journal
    We had to destroy IIS in order to save us^H^Hit.

  • Slippery Slope? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by tekiegreg ( 674773 ) * <tekieg1-slashdot@yahoo.com> on Thursday October 30, 2003 @01:14PM (#7348797) Homepage Journal
    Ok so we're going all open source, who's next? OSX? OS/2? Maybe a Linux distro because it's too "proprietary?". Frankly freedom of choice, even if it is the MS route really needs to be preserved. Thoughts?

  • SCO warning (Score:4, Funny)

    by henrygb ( 668225 ) on Thursday October 30, 2003 @01:14PM (#7348802)
    Before you start asking Vietnam for Linux licesnces, remember they are Communists.

  • Losing business? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by BWJones ( 18351 ) on Thursday October 30, 2003 @01:15PM (#7348808) Homepage Journal
    And they would require all computers assembled in Vietnam to be sold with open-source products installed on them."

    Well, that could lose the country some contracts for companies that might want to build facilities there to assemble computers..... As much an advocate I am for open source, this sounds like a bad implementation of law.

    • Actually, this might get them some new business. First of all, which big company you know doesn't already buy Windows separately and just wipe out the OEM version? Then, how many people you know that haven't already bought an OS for their previous PC and can install it on the next one, as a matter of fair use?
    • What would stop a reseller like Dell from installing whatever OS they liked after it left the factory / country?

      I wouldn't say that manditory OS lockin is an appropriate measure, but neither is the backstabing monopolization that COTS players have been doing for the last 20 years. If you have to play hardball to compete with the US backed IT giants, then so be it.

    • Re:Losing business? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Dav3K ( 618318 ) on Thursday October 30, 2003 @01:28PM (#7349013)
      There is nothing preventing a user from purchasing Windows and installing it on these 'open source' computers. And think of it - if the government sets a mandate of using linux and OSS on all of their machines, why in hell would they consent to purchasing ANY computer that has MS pre-installed? That's like paying extra for the block-heater option on your car while living in Arizona. It's just not needed. Given MS's monopoly on the desktop spread EXACTLY in this manner (default OS on all new computers) legislation like this would at least ensure that computers in Vietnam would have an alternative beginning.

      • Re:Losing business? (Score:3, Insightful)

        by GoofyBoy ( 44399 )
        >There is nothing preventing a user from purchasing Windows and installing it on these 'open source' computers.

        It costs more for retail version of the OS than buying it OEM.

        >if the government sets a mandate of using linux and OSS on all of their machines

        Its not only goverment needs.
        From the article:
        And they would require all computers assembled in Vietnam to be sold with open-source products installed on them.

        So if I buy a computer for home, the government is telling private companies what to inst

        • Re:Losing business? (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Jason Earl ( 1894 ) on Thursday October 30, 2003 @03:25PM (#7350586) Homepage Journal

          The reason that Vietnam is doing this is that they have to lower their piracy ratio or the won't be allowed into the WTO. That leaves Vietnam with two choices. Either they can start cracking down on piracy, or they can mandate that all computers be installed with Free Software on them.

          Of the two the Free Software route is certainly easier. They can go to the WTO, and with straight faces say that all of the PCs shipped in the country ship with legal software. Sure, there will still be a bustling software piracy business going on underneath the surface, but Vietnam will be able to say that they are taking steps.

          This is especially true because it would appear that Vietnam is very serious about shifting the government and government held businesses to Free Software. This, IMHO, makes perfect sense. The cost of using Microsoft software is simply too high for countries like Vietnam where the average yearly income is less than $500. Microsoft's TCO numbers assume that the cost of labor is going to be far higher than the cost of software licenses, and in Vietnam that simply isn't the case.

          In Vietnam it probably *is* cheaper to fix Free Software so that it does what they want than to purchase software from Microsoft.

          In short, this moves makes a whole lot of sense. Not only will this help jumpstart their own local software industry, but it will lower costs and cut down dramatically on piracy as well (which, of course, is the major goal). When the WTO treaties were written up the first world countries probably thought that this would force Vietnam to purchase more software. Instead it drove them to consider Free Software.

          • Re:Losing business? (Score:3, Interesting)

            by cgenman ( 325138 )
            In Vietnam it probably *is* cheaper to fix Free Software so that it does what they want than to purchase software from Microsoft.

            That reminds me of the origins of Star Office. Apparently Sun (a rather large organization) looked at the cost of buying MS Office licenses for all of its workers, looked at the cost of buying the rights to a software suite and modifying it to their needs, and realized that it was cheaper to just do it themselves. Of course, there were other reasons, but the economies of Micro

    • Re:Losing business? (Score:2, Interesting)

      by h8macs ( 301553 )
      I doubt it, if anything it will increase business, companies will be "forced" to adapt to continue to work in a cheap "slave" labor environment. This is a brilliant forward thinking step to take. I think that they will be proven correct in the step that they have taken. Vietnam may make a name for themselves and change their appearance to the ignorant.
      My .02 anyhow.

  • Not necessarily a good thing. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by jonfelder ( 669529 ) on Thursday October 30, 2003 @01:16PM (#7348817)
    While I think it's good that Vietnam wants to move to open source, I think that forcing computer vendors to ship only open source products is not the way to go.

    Open source is supposed to be about freedom and choice. Seems counter productive to me, to force people to use open source. If open source advocates try to encourage this kind of behavior, how are they better than Microsoft?
    • If open source advocates try to encourage this kind of behavior, how are they better than Microsoft?

      We're probably not. We're just not a monopoly that illegally leverages its dominance in OS'es to try to take over other market segments. When we get to that point, then you can bitch at us.

      • >We're just not a monopoly that illegally

        That hasn't been determined in Vietnam.

        >When we get to that point, then you can bitch at us.

        This is not a "ends justifies the means" or "we will stop kill people when all our enemies are dead".

        OpenSource is about choice. It is different from automatically removing a choice (MS).
    • It's probably not worse than having all PCs ship with Windows. In fact, since I hear Windows is available for cheap on the streets in other parts of the world, anyone who wants Windows could probably get it for a small fee and install it on their GNU/Linux computer. The ubiquity of Windows and its availability means that comsumers can choose it if they like, and many are probably likely to do so. Looks to me like forcing all PCs to ship with free and/or open source software is the only realistic way to g
    • I think that forcing computer vendors to ship only open source products is not the way to go.

      While in principle I agree with you, and you do have a good point, I must point out, that today many computer vendors are practically forced to ship computers with Windows. Having some vendors forced to ship something else might be a good way to change that, does sound like more fair competition. Of course the problem is, how do we know when Microsofts position have been weakened enough to let go again?
    • You are free to remove the free software you got, and install your commercial software on top: you still got all of the choice you need.

      But by default you are encouraging people to look at a new system, which also happens to be free.

      Miguel

  • From the article (Score:5, Funny)

    by LNO ( 180595 ) on Thursday October 30, 2003 @01:16PM (#7348819)
    Cuong, Microsoft's Vietnam representative, acknowledges that open source poses a threat to commercial software companies. ``They give away innovation,'' he said.

    Giving away innovation smacks of Communism. We need to invade Vietnam before this "giving away" idea spreads throughout Southeast Asia.

    Soon Cambodia may start giving away innovation, and then Japan and Australia will be isolated and they'll fall as well.

    My god .. it's like dominos.

    Where are Robert McNamara and Henry Kissinger when you need them?
    • We need to invade Vietnam before this "giving away" idea spreads throughout Southeast Asia.

      Kill them all, let Gates sort 'em out
    • Giving away innovation smacks of Communism.

      Funny, but just to nitpick, you can't "give away" anything if you don't own it. Communism is based on the premise that everything is owned by a small elite (government) through force, rather than distributed among the population through voluntary trade.

  • Open Source != Linux! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Junks Jerzey ( 54586 ) on Thursday October 30, 2003 @01:18PM (#7348852)
    Or maybe it does now. The two terms are used interchangeably.

    • Get Used To It (Score:3, Insightful)

      by blunte ( 183182 )
      Linux is the premier OSS product as far as most of the world is concerned.

      It's like Coke being just another carbonated gut-rot drink, one of many, but many people generically refer to all pop as "Coke".

      And for the GNU/Linux fans, sorry. Just be proud that GNU is the secret sauce of Linux. But don't expect Joe Sixpack to refer to _the operating system_ as GNU/Linux.

  • Piracy Shift? (Score:5, Funny)

    by mopslik ( 688435 ) on Thursday October 30, 2003 @01:18PM (#7348853)

    Nation's solution to software piracy: "Eliminate Microsoft"

    Surely this will only shift the piracy to open-source applications. Why, by 2005, I'll bet there will be hundreds -- nay, thousands! -- of copies of Redhat and Mandrake circulating around Vietnam for free! And thousands of applications too! The horror!

  • Sounds like a monopoly.

  • this is ill-conceived (Score:3, Informative)

    by Eponymous Coward ( 6097 ) on Thursday October 30, 2003 @01:18PM (#7348860)
    Why is a regulation like this even necessary? Why not do the traditional thing like evaluate competing solutions on their relative merits (initial software cost being only one of the factors). I could understand requiring all data to be stored by default in an open format, but a single-vendor ban is silly.
    • 1) Not a single vendor ban, they want to raise OpenSource, not kill Microsoft. Since Microsoft is a monopoly, it just seems like a single vendor ban.
      2) Essential becuase of network effects and inertia. If Microsoft and Linux have the same effective purchase cost (because of piracy) why would you overcome the inertia to switch?
      3) Necessary because of trade regulations that require piracy numbers to go lower. No license to purchase, no piracy. Thats why it needs to be a law.
      • >Not a single vendor ban, they want to raise OpenSource, not kill Microsoft.

        From the article:
        We are trying step by step to eliminate Microsoft,'' said Nguyen Trung Quynh of Vietnam's Ministry of Science and Technology.

        >Necessary because of trade regulations that require piracy numbers to go lower. No license to purchase, no piracy.

        Piracy usually means doing things not within the goverment's control so how can they legistlate something that should be legistated already?

        I can still get and install W

    • RTFA! (Score:3, Insightful)

      by IWannaBeAnAC ( 653701 )
      To save you the bother, I will summarize it briefly:

      They need to the the piracy rate down so they can meet previously-agreed WTO and WIPO limits. They are having lots of trouble stopping piracy because of (I guess) cultural reasons, the population simply don't recognize "piracy" as being wrong. Mandating OSS is percieved as the only realistic way of achieving the desired reduction in piracy.

      Kinda ironic really, that the WIPO are basically forcing OSS onto them :-)

      • And (Score:2)

        by blunte ( 183182 )
        Since according to the article, Windows costs $140 on average there, and the average annual income of people in Vietnam is $420, I think it should be clear why they're not paying for it.

        MS could have prevented this in the first place had it adjusted prices accordingly for different countries. If it were $25 or even $50, the piracy rate could be controlled better. But the Vietnam govt knows it has NO chance of reducing piracy when its people just cannot pay the price.

        So the pragmatic solution is to manda

      • Re:RTFA! (Score:5, Interesting)

        by sean23007 ( 143364 ) on Thursday October 30, 2003 @06:57PM (#7352888) Homepage Journal
        They are having lots of trouble stopping piracy because of (I guess) cultural reasons, the population simply don't recognize "piracy" as being wrong.

        You don't have to guess. It's quite simple, really, and it's not because of any cultural blindness to the concept of piracy, whether or not there is any such blindness. The reason piracy is so prevalent is solely economical. The Vietnam version of Windows costs $140, while the annual per capita income of Vietnam is $2250. Given the choice, would you pay Microsoft 6% of your annual income, or would you try to get it for free? By comparison, Windows costs $300 in the US, while the US per capita income is $37600. This amounts to only 0.8% of the average American's annual income versus 6% of the average Vietnamese's. Imagine if Microsoft tried to charge the same relative prices here in the US? Relatively, it costs 7.5x as much in Vietnam, so try to think about how many people would pay, say, $2250 for their copy of Windows, and how many would steal it. And then, to combat the rampant piracy, the government would have to act in some way, and it is considerably easier to make a new regulation about open source than to start fining/jailing people for refusing to pay for something that no one in their right mind would pay for. It's ridiculous, and Microsoft should know this.
    • Why not do the traditional thing like evaluate competing solutions on their relative merits

      It seems they already did that concluded that in their own interest they'd better make free software a matter of policy. It's simple reallly, if they don't take this step it's only a matter of time before the BSA goon squads arrive, backed up by U.S. trade representatives. There's just no way they can afford to build an information infrastructure if they have to pay Microsoft's asking price.

      It will be interesting
  • "A pirated copy of Windows and Office goes for no more than $10"
    That's still a weeks pay for the average worker by their figures, Microsoft's greed seems inordinate expecting people to pay $140. Well, they seem to have totally priced themselves out of this market.

  • in other news... (Score:5, Funny)

    by headGasket ( 119022 ) on Thursday October 30, 2003 @01:20PM (#7348883)
    president Tran Duc Luong announced the renaming of all citizen named Nguyen to NGNUYEN. .. ...

  • .COMmunist (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Dr. Bent ( 533421 ) <ben&int,com> on Thursday October 30, 2003 @01:21PM (#7348895) Homepage
    If the Vietnameese government can't enfore the licensing terms of propritary software, why would they enfore the GPL or any other Open Source license?

    The real problem in Vietnam (and most other countries run by communist, oligarchical governments) is that IP laws are treated as optional...something that you vaugely enforce in order to appease trade policy negotiators from 1st world countries. Switching to "Open Source" won't fix that problem.

    • If the Vietnameese government can't enfore the licensing terms of propritary software, why would they enfore the GPL or any other Open Source license?

      Aren't communists supposed to help each other?

    • Re:.COMmunist (Score:5, Insightful)

      by pavon ( 30274 ) on Thursday October 30, 2003 @02:03PM (#7349468)
      The real problem in Vietnam (and most other countries run by communist, oligarchical governments) is that IP laws are treated as optional...

      Yeah, but would that be a problem for free software? If you talk to Richard Stallman, he looks forward to the day where we don't have any software copyright at all; until that day we have the GPL. The purpose of GPL is to keep others from putting their own licence on modified free software restricting it from use. If there was no copyright, then there would be no legal mechanism to restrict the way people use code, and thus the GPL wouldn't be necisarry. The only mechanism for hording source code would be to keep it secret and well guarded. However, the Vietnam "IP problem" is that there is rampent software copying. In a society like this which considers copying software to be sharing, not stealing, the people would not like companies that held back code, and would have no qualms with leaking that code.

      The complete lack of software copyright is exactly what the FSF would like to see. GPL'd software is a step in the process; a feasibility experiment you might say. The purpose of copyright is to provide insentive for the author to create more works. If free software succeeds in displacing proprietary software, then it proves that there is plenty of incentive to create software, even without copyright. In that case copyright is unnecisarry, and even harmful to society because it limits who can use the software without justification. If it turns out that the incentive provided by copyright is necisarry, then the free software movement will never be able to produce enough software as good as proprietary software so it fizzle out or remain on the sidelines, and no one will be harmed.

      Note: I did not extend my arguement to all works. Some may need the insentive that copyright provides, others may not. So Vietnam's copyright policies (not IP - there is no such thing as IP) may be bad for some industries, but if the FSF is right (which I think they are) it is not bad for software.
  • I guess microsoft was right all along.
  • Free software is the same as "free as in beer".

    Does it matter?

  • The only solution, really (Score:5, Insightful)

    by JGski ( 537049 ) on Thursday October 30, 2003 @01:22PM (#7348913) Journal
    I've spent enough time in southeast Asian to know that the chances of eliminating piracy of closed-source products is about as close to zero as you can get. Going to open source is just about the only way the Government has to avoid trouble with the WTO and there's just about nothing Microsoft can realistically do short of dropping their prices to the blackmarket established pricing levels - which would mean selling at a loss given their expense and capital structure. They will have the fig-leaf for international markets: "We officially and actively support only non-infringing software". Excellently played capitalist move for a communist government!

    This is the inevitable result for most Microsoft forays outside the developed world. Add to that Microsoft's problem of having saturating the markets in the developed world and, as a public company, needing to continue an unsustainable double-digit growth rate. Add to this their market extensions into non-computing markets are lack-luster and largely failed. You have to be worried if you own a lot of MSFT stock or if you are overly invest simply due to being an employee.

    Love my Panther (he says writing this on WinXP!)
    JGSki

  • Why don't announcements like these affect Microsoft's stock price? You'd think that after Germany, China, South Korea, Japan, and Vietnam announced their intention to ditch Microsoft products in favor of Linux, the price of MSFT shares would drop.
    • Becuase the announcements, so far, are not backed by any action. When sales in the SE Asia market drops 75% in a quarter, then you'll see the street react.

  • Microsoft between a rock and a hard place (Score:3, Interesting)

    by kaan ( 88626 ) on Thursday October 30, 2003 @01:25PM (#7348957)
    Given the following:

    a) this move will greatly reduce software piracy, and
    b) we all know that Microsoft loses zillions of dollars per year software piracy

    Does it follow that Microsoft will be supportive of Vietname moving to Open Source solutions?

    Funny situation, because it puts Microsoft between a rock and a hard place - continue losing money in the conventional way (piracy), or lose money in a new way when the few paying customers stop buying MS products altogether. Sweet!
    • The reason that microsoft is not for this, also serves as proof that they don't lose as much to piracy as they claim they do.

      To lose money by theft, you are claiming that that people would by your product if it were not available by the black market. This isn't necessarily the case as the music industry is finding out. I'll download a song like Vehicle by the Ides of March, but if it weren't available I wouldn't go buy their greatest hits.

      Instead of using pirated windows, these people will now use fr
  • A community of academics and idealistic computer programmers develop the open-source products online, collaborating to improve them.

    I'm all for linux but describing open source as if its still 1997 is getting old quick. Huge corporate interests are involved and companies such as IBM, HP and many others have plugged boatloads of developers into coding open source software. You have to wonder where this "silliconvalley.com" lived over the last 5 years....

  • That's a really good answer by Vietnam (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Animats ( 122034 ) on Thursday October 30, 2003 @01:27PM (#7348987) Homepage
    Understand what's happening here. The US has an ongoing effort called Special 301 [ustr.gov], to apply heavy pressure to countries that don't do enough to stop software piracy.
    • Government Use of Software

      In October 1998, the United States announced a new Executive Order directing U.S. Government agencies to maintain appropriate and effective procedures to ensure legitimate use of software. In addition, USTR was directed to undertake an initiative to work with other governments, particularly those in need of modernizing their software management systems or about which concerns have been expressed, regarding inappropriate government use of illegal software.

      The United States has achieved considerable progress under this initiative. Countries that have issued decrees mandating the use of only authorized software by government ministries include Bolivia, China, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, the Czech Republic, France, Ireland, Israel, Jordan, Paraguay, Thailand, the U.K., Spain, Peru, Greece, Turkey, Hungary, Korea, Hong Kong, Macau, Lebanon, Taiwan and the Philippines. Ambassador Zoellick was pleased that these governments have recognized the importance of setting an example in this area and expects that these decrees will be fully implemented. The United States looks forward to the adoption of similar decrees, with effective and transparent procedures that ensure legitimate use of software, by additional governments in the coming year.

    Countries which convert to free software become compliant. The alternatives are converting to free software, paying millions (sometimes billions) to Microsoft, or facing trade sanctions by the US. That makes free software look really good.

    The whole Special 301 process may thus backfire against commercial software vendors. Microsoft is going to have a fit over this.

    • Yup, when I read this a huge smile just spread across my face. Eliminate piracy? Sure thing. Let us just get rid of your product all together.

      100% complaince. Just not exactly what MS had in mind. Will it work? Well who cares. Everytime MS has to kowtow to some tiny little country by lowering the price or reducing restrictions other countries are taking notice. After munich would any decent goverment negioting a new MS contract not mention Linux? Now if the US is leaning on you to combat piracy just mentio

  • OSS versus Microsoft (Score:2, Interesting)

    by defunc ( 238921 )
    I think one point that is often overlooked in the crusade of eliminating Microsoft from the software landspace (very unlikely, but still worth the thought) is the impact it will have on the US software industry (global perhaps??).

    Just blink for a second Microsoft filing chapter 11 tomorrow. How many people will lose their jobs? System integrators? Partners? Businesses that rely on them for support? Home users of ma and pa homes? They have build a co-dependent ecosystems that kept the sofware business afloa
    • If Microsoft was gone tomorrow, there would be hardship, but not as much as most people think.

      As all of their contracts are nullified, thousands of businesses to provide "support" for Microsoft products would spring up.

      IT departments would then take a long, hard look at the other options offered to them. Novell? UNIX? Linux? Apple?

      It isn't like the only option is Microsoft. Yeah, it would be bad for consumers, but it isn't like people will stop writing software for an OS with such a huge installed

  • Help Microsoft save some money. (Score:3, Funny)

    by luiss ( 217284 ) on Thursday October 30, 2003 @01:28PM (#7348999)

    From the Article:

    But Microsoft products are everywhere in Vietnam, and very few shell out the money for licensed copies. Almost 97 percent of the programs used in Vietnam have been illegally copied, costing Microsoft an estimated $40 million to $50 million a year.

    I wonder if Microsoft brings makes more than 40-50 million a year profit in Vietnam? If not, this new policy could save them money! :)

  • Perspective (Score:5, Informative)

    by Mr_Silver ( 213637 ) on Thursday October 30, 2003 @01:29PM (#7349033)
    Microsoft Windows and Office cost at least $140 in Vietnam -- way out of reach for most people, where the per capita annual income is roughly $420.

    In other words, Windows and Office costs a third of your annual income. According to the Bureau of Economic Analysis [doc.gov] the per capital annual income of the US in 2002 was $30,832.

    Therefore, Windows and Office would cost you a staggering $10,277. It is not surprising that piracy is rampant!

    Also assuming Thailand has the same per capital annual income as Vietnam, then even when Microsoft reduced the price down to $40 it still would cost slightly a nasty $3,083 in the US.

    • Don't compare the average of what people make in both contries than figure out the proportion. Take the incomes of all the people who own computers in both countries and do that. Then you'll realize the numbers are quite different. Why? Because most of the people in places like vietnam make almost nothing. But there are a few rich people who make a lot of money. Those are the people who own computers and who are potential customers for microsoft. In this country where possibly more than half (not sur

  • Open Source changes the balance (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Simonetta ( 207550 ) on Thursday October 30, 2003 @01:32PM (#7349070)
    Open Source will change the balance of power in the information age between the industrial first world nations towards the poorer third-world.

    As more industrial and post-industrial nations put patent and copyright restrictions on software (or, as the case in the USA with SCO vs. Linux, try to make open-source illegal altogether), development will shift to areas of the world where the amount gained by bringing in the open-source software industry is greater than the amount lost to entrenched software companies.

    In the long-run fifty year period, efforts by the first-world to restrict dissemination of information by means of the Internet will backfire as the new on-line libraries of data shift to distant locations that are less affected by the legal means used by monopoly media corporations to shut them down. As the libraries shift, so will the technical expertise migrate to the third-world. And, as the technical expertise of the information age moves away from the software cops of the media monopolies, so with the creative community that is now locked to the media corporations.

    In the long run, the RIAA, MPAA, BSA, and other enforcement arms of the first-world media monopolies will destroy the very media conglomerates that they are trying to protect.
  • The U.S. could take a cue from this and eliminate social security payments by terminating the elderly.

    Next, we could reduce air pollution by 99% by destroying all the cars and walking everywhere!

    Progress!!

  • My worry..... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by icejai ( 214906 ) on Thursday October 30, 2003 @01:36PM (#7349123)
    This initiative by Vietnam seems like a great one.
    It will/should reduce piracy, enforce the notion opensource applications and operating systems are viable MS replacements on servers and on desktops.


    One thing concerns me though.


    I'm just worried that the situation will move from one form of infringement to the next.


    I mean, what if GPL isn't respected? Will the Vietnamese government act? If they couldn't control the piracy in the first place, doesn't that raise any doubt with their ability to uphold the GPL?


    Or, will Vietnam abandon GPL'd software for "truly free" (bsd-style licensed) software later on? ... like they're doing now by abandoning MS software for opensource (The article says they're going to use mainly linux, which is GPL)?

  • Two quotes (Score:5, Insightful)

    by mkro ( 644055 ) on Thursday October 30, 2003 @01:38PM (#7349143)
    Microsoft Windows and Office cost at least $140 in Vietnam -- way out of reach for most people, where the per capita annual income is roughly $420.
    and
    Almost 97 percent of the programs used in Vietnam have been illegally copied, costing Microsoft an estimated $40 million to $50 million a year.
    Demonstrates how serious we should take their "estimated loss", doesn't it?
  • Sure, it's only Vietnam. But it's the beginning. As I said elsewhere [slashdot.org], if you know people are going to copy software, you might as well make sure that they aren't going to be doing so illegally.

    It's a laugh to see the Microsoft fanboys bleating about "freedom of choice" being compromised. The words "dose of one's own medicine" spring to mind. After years of not being able to buy a laptop without Windows pre-installed, now the tide is going to turn. The components used in the construction of this compu

  • I wish journalists (and everyone) would understand (Score:3, Insightful)

    by XaXXon ( 202882 ) <xaxxon.gmail@com> on Thursday October 30, 2003 @01:43PM (#7349200) Homepage
    But Microsoft products are everywhere in Vietnam, and very few shell out the money for licensed copies. Almost 97 percent of the programs used in Vietnam have been illegally copied, costing Microsoft an estimated $40 million to $50 million a year.

    It's not costing Microsoft jack, because that $40-50 million never existed. If you could have never had the money in the first place, then it's not costing you anything.
  • The global war between the richest entity in the world and an invisible, omnipresent network of loosely affiliated die-hard extremists who live off untraceable sources of funding, wage a near-religious war, and threaten to topple a hegemony that has ruled for twenty years.

    Yes, it's the Talinux and Osama Gnu Laden, striking fear into the hearts of Microsoft dealers and agents everywhere.

    Seriously, how many such battles can Microsoft wage at once? OK to send the shock troopers to Munchen, to Costa Rica, but it's starting to become a conflaguration.

    Laugh, but I predict the last stronghold of Windows will be the US, while in a few years only the rest of the world will have gratefully converted to Linux and FOSS and forgotten the dark ages of 'software license fees'.
  • They have to bring down a 97% priracy rate and windows is more than 1/4 of the per capita annual income. Obviously, these vendors haven't been loading "legit" copies of windows and the easiest and fastest way to get them to stop is to require them to preinstall Open Source software.

    I believe in freedom as much as the next guy, but if it was my responsibility to bring down piracy so that my country could join the WTO, I can't say I wouldn't be as drastic. Choice is great, but without access to the internati

  • How much are computers there? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by BigZaphod ( 12942 ) on Thursday October 30, 2003 @01:56PM (#7349380) Homepage
    If the per capita income is that low but piracy is apparently insanely out of control, wouldn't that imply there are a LOT of computer users there? How do they afford machines to run Windows on if they make so little?

    What kind of hardware is available/common in that part of Asia?

  • Microsoft will never admit this publicy... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Lendrick ( 314723 ) on Thursday October 30, 2003 @02:10PM (#7349563) Homepage Journal
    ...but they're most certainly aware that, if someone wasn't going to pay for software in the first place, they're better off if that person is running pirated Microsoft software than Linux. Because the more market penetration Linux has, the less reason there is for other people to buy Windows. So while Microsoft's estimated losses will plummet under this new plan, its real losses will rise. Funny how that works.

  • Seems like a sound decision... (Score:3, Informative)

    by Eric Damron ( 553630 ) on Thursday October 30, 2003 @02:23PM (#7349732)
    "Microsoft Windows and Office cost at least $140 in Vietnam -- way out of reach for most people, where the per capita annual income is roughly $420."

    In a country where the general population simply can't afford Microsoft licenses open source is a sound solution. Especially considering the anti-piracy agreements made between the US and Vietnam. They have to do something or face consequences.

    I found this interesting:

    " But Microsoft products are everywhere in Vietnam, and very few shell out the money for licensed copies. Almost 97 percent of the programs used in Vietnam have been illegally copied, costing Microsoft an estimated $40 million to $50 million a year."

    Given that the per capita annual income is roughly $420 there is no way that the piracy is costing Microsoft anywhere near $50 million a year. This is the same kind of logic that the music industry uses to try to justify and push through draconian laws.

    A company only takes a loss when they actually lose a sale not every time someone pirates their product.

  • Propaganda (Score:3, Interesting)

    by 99bottles ( 257169 ) on Thursday October 30, 2003 @02:59PM (#7350194)
    I stopped reading the article after choking on this quote:
    "Almost 97 percent of the programs used in Vietnam have been illegally copied, costing Microsoft an estimated $40 million to $50 million a year."

    I doubt many, if any, of these people would pay such a large portion of their annual income for this software. Microsoft would never get this money, they should at least appreciate the exposure. After all, Microsoft is 90% marketing and 10% functionality...

    Ahh, random statistics make me feel so impotent... er, um make that important!

Slashdot Top Deals

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Close