BBC News have published an article by Richard Stallman of the Free Software Foundation with a reaction to Bill Gates retirement that then leads onto a full attack on proprietary software.

I can’t of course defend some actions by some companies like Microsoft that have engaged in anti-competitive and other dubious practices however the actions of these specific companies is not a reason to switch everything to open source.

Mr Stallman says “Gates didn’t invent proprietary software, and thousands of other companies do the same thing. It’s wrong, no matter who does it.”

It’s wrong? What a load of rubbish.

I’ve no issue with open source software - there is excellent software produced under GPL not least WordPress which this very blog is built on! However whether a piece of software is open source is up to the owner and therefore stating that it is wrong is none of Stallman’s business.

If I spent a large amount of my time on a software project I reserve the right to have the sole rights to the source code. If I choose to make it available to general community then again it is my choice.

I’ve got to say my personal belief depends entirely on what the project is. If it is a project that I’m interested in and would just like to share my ideas with others I may well make it open source. However if I felt that it had commercial value and there is a market for it then I’d make sure it was tied up like a kipper so I can maximize the potential of the product for sale.

Wrong? No just common sense for a lot of people.

So free software or proprietary software is a choice for developers and also the end user. The Free Software Foundation is a noble idea and if you are happy with it that’s fine but certainly don’t push it on people that don’t agree.

Technology is one area where fierce supporters of applications and services seem to be very common. Some companies employ people as evangelists to promote products or some cases people are so passionate about a product or service they will evangelise just for their love of it.

I’ve no problem with people being passionate about things but I really believe that some people are actually damaging the very things they love so much.

It’s all very well following a technology and being enthusiastic about it but there are still lines that shouldn’t be crossed. Without a solid argument about why you are so pleased with the said item just isn’t going to cut it with the people who aren’t as appreciative as yourself. Saying it’s cool just isn’t enough for most people.

Also even with the enthusiasm you have you must not be blinkered but instead be balanced with your arguments. Again saying it’s just better in every way than the competition just doesn’t sound convincing unless you have plenty to back it up. If you actually give credit where it’s due to the competition you can actually make your own argument stronger.

And finally personal attacks are just right out - they just make you look stupid.

This is not to say that all followers don’t follow these rules, on the whole they do, but there seems to be a small minded percentage of evangelists (or is that zealots?) who really give a bad impression.

There are two groups that are particularly vocal and also seem to have a hardcore of extremely vocal, and in my eyes, damaging fans. I’m of course talking about supporters of Open Source software and Apple products.

I’ve personally had a few run-ins with Apple fanboys in the past not least on a previous blog post (although I must admit I did bait them to see the reaction). You expect the odd idiot (there are enough online anyway) but the regularity that they appear when anything even slightly negative about Apple is published has clouded my judgement when it comes to anything Apple (The comments approved on the blog post show some of the better fans). I know damn well that some will comment stating I’m a fool and Apple don’t need my business anyway but I know I’m not the only one that has this reaction. Surely if you love the product so much you want to talk everyone around to your way of thinking? If the product is so good you should be able to argue the merits?

In the end this extreme reaction is actually damaging to Apple, the Apple brand and community and sometimes I wonder if these people just want to keep Apple as an exclusive club or maybe just don’t have the skills to have a discussion. I’d be interested to hear from any Apple fans on their opinion of the fanboys. Is there any split in the community or is it just ignored?

The Open Source movement also has some strong proponents and again some blinkered ones (although generally I’ve found most to be just interested in furthering the cause). If you take a look at Slashdot and wait for anything related to propeiety software (in particular Microsoft) you’ll see a load of people slagging it off without any real reason - just see the insults fly! I’m subscribed to the Slashdot feed but I never even look at the comments anymore as I don’t enjoy adolescent slagging matches.

I use Open Source software where I believe there is an advantage but I don’t believe all companies or individuals should have to tie their colours to one mast. People should respect everyone’s choice even if their views differ. Generally speaking there is an Open Source version of an application but not all are superior to their proprietary counterparts.

The only solution I can see is the communities to these loose cannons claim to be part of push them out themselves. Surely it must get on your nerves too? It makes people tar you with the same brush?

Just a bit of an update with things happening with regards to online regulation and protection. Further to the posts I’ve written about whether social media networks need regulation there have been some additional moves made by the British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) who govern the age ratings for video content and video games.

It seems the BBFC are to introduce age ratings for downloaded content and games - obviously this is voluntary as the anonymity of the Internet means it’s virtual impossible to uphold. However as I’ve mentioned before parents must take more responsibility for this and at least the tools for them to use to do so are becoming ever more available. If parents’ methods of protecting their children is made as easy as possible you are only going to see them being increasingly adopted.

In addition there is an interesting post about the issue of informed consent posted by dot life. It correctly states that the current situation is a bit of a farce - since when do people read terms and conditions online? However a working group has been appointed to come up with recommendations by the end of the year. Hopefully with several country’s Information Commissioners and firms like Microsoft and Facebook involved there might be interesting results. Perhaps recommendations for online privacy best practices for online companies to aspire too?

It seems that Yahoo! has been able to avoid the attempts of Microsoft to buy them up. Certainly it makes Microsoft look the major loser in all of this however is Yahoo! really the victor?

Share prices of both Yahoo! and Microsoft are likely to drop because of this and I wouldn’t be surprised to see Google prices rise.

Yahoo! gets to keep it’s independence but the question is for how long? Their market share has been dropping steady and with Google’s dominance of the search market it’s not easy for either Yahoo! or Microsoft to get a foothold against the search leader.

I actually think the failure of this potential merger is in the long term going to be damaging for both Microsoft and Yahoo! We can only hope that individually they can make up some ground against Google otherwise the monopoly Google could exercise could be very dangerous for online community in general.

Comments on a post about this on BBC News dot.life shows I’m not the only one with this belief. I’ve got to say I’m a little disappointed as I was very interested to see how the two different cultures of Microsoft and Yahoo! would combine - what kind of company would Microhoo! have been?