On Wed, 13 Dec 2006, Brian Tan Seng wrote:
I'd say let the FOSS bill be passed and enacted because it has merit. With
enough constructive thought from this group, I hope it becomes an enabling
factor for our countrymen.
Well said! Cuts right through the anti-FOSS FUD.
--[Manny [EMAIL PROTECT
I'd say let the FOSS bill be passed and enacted because it has merit. With
enough constructive thought from this group, I hope it becomes an enabling
factor for our countrymen.
On 12/8/06, Dean Michael Berris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
snip... snip...
Let FOSS get into government on its own m
On 12/8/06, Ian Dexter R. Marquez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 12/8/06, Dean Michael Berris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Vendors/solutions should be chosen *first* by meeting
> specifications/requirements, then among the qualified candidates
> choose the most cost-effective solution.
That's wha
On 12/8/06, Dean Michael Berris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Vendors/solutions should be chosen *first* by meeting
specifications/requirements, then among the qualified candidates
choose the most cost-effective solution.
That's what the different stages of government procurement are
actually impl
On 12/8/06, Roberto Verzola <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I am also a FOSS advocate, and I think I've done my fair share of
> advocating in my own ways. However I disagree with making government
> agencies choose FOSS over commercial licensed software _ALL THE TIME_
> in cases where there is a cho
Dean Michael Berris wrote:
Choose: M$ as default, FOSS on a case-to-case basis, or
FOSS as default, M$ on a case-to-case basis.
How about no default, decide on a case-to-case basis?
Amen to that.
_
Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mai
Hi Obet,
On 12/8/06, Roberto Verzola <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But why choose FOSS over commercial software (more appropriately,
> Non-FOSS) for all cases by law? Why not just have government choose
> which one is cheaper on a case to case basis, and have the third
> parties actually bid for
ah, then a bill should address that, but in my opinion that bill should not
require FOSS. it should instead require interoperability by espousing open
standards.
you don't correct a wrong by doing another wrong. but then that's just my
opinion.
On 12/8/06, Daniel Escasa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
Sabi ni Andre noong Fri, Dec 8, 2006 at 11:07 AM:
hmm I don't remember any law or bill saying that Microsoft (Windows or
Office) is the default for government procurements.
It's called a de-facto requirement. You won't find a law requiring
Microsoft's or any other proprietary software, but look
hmm I don't remember any law or bill saying that Microsoft (Windows or
Office) is the default for government procurements.
sometimes I have the feeling that we are arguing about these things
endlessly because we have different viewpoints when it comes to "choice." on
one hand, the pro-FOSS bill p
> I am also a FOSS advocate, and I think I've done my fair share of
> advocating in my own ways. However I disagree with making government
> agencies choose FOSS over commercial licensed software _ALL THE TIME_
> in cases where there is a choice -- I would rather have the government
> agencies make
> But why choose FOSS over commercial software (more appropriately,
> Non-FOSS) for all cases by law? Why not just have government choose
> which one is cheaper on a case to case basis, and have the third
> parties actually bid for providing these software and services to the
> government?
This is
On 12/7/06, Rogelio Serrano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 12/5/06, Andre John Cruz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> exactly. let us use real arguments and points in arguing our cause.
>
> that being said, i would reiterate that a more practical bill would have
> been to enforce the use of interoperab
On 12/7/06, Roberto Verzola <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Dean.
> Hi Sir Obet,
Obet lang pls... We are not members of a round table...
Okay. :)
Hi Obet,
>
> Hmmm... Should the government make a choice by law? Or shouldn't
> government play fair and do it on a case to case basis?
In fact,
On 12/7/06, Rage Callao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I also think the bill is not going far enough in terms of education
and training that would foster an environment that is conducive to its
success.
Amen.
Indeed, I think the bill needs a big cluebat. It appears that the
FOSS community itself
On 12/7/06, Rogelio Serrano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 12/5/06, Andre John Cruz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> exactly. let us use real arguments and points in arguing our cause.
>
> that being said, i would reiterate that a more practical bill would have
> been to enforce the use of interoperab
Hi Dean.
> Hi Sir Obet,
Obet lang pls... We are not members of a round table...
>
> Hmmm... Should the government make a choice by law? Or shouldn't
> government play fair and do it on a case to case basis?
In fact, today, the law and govt rules require that among bids which meet
specification
On 12/5/06, Andre John Cruz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
exactly. let us use real arguments and points in arguing our cause.
that being said, i would reiterate that a more practical bill would have
been to enforce the use of interoperable protocols and (file format)
standards. that would, in my op
Hi Sir Obet,
On 12/3/06, Roberto Verzola <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On the mandatory implementation of F/OSS within the Gov't, I am on the side
> of pro-choice. Same with my clients, I always promote and recommend
> M$but also inform them of the alternative, F/OSS. Then I leave up to
> the
Hi Marvin,
On 12/3/06, Marvin T. Pascual <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello all,
I can't stand it anymore. If you just read the postcript of Federico D.
Pascual Jr. at http://www.philstar.com/philstar/NEWS200612032602.htm it is
unfair to us advocates of the F/OSS that we don't have any press rel
Sabi ni Andre noong Tue, Dec 5, 2006 at 10:35 AM:
that being said, i would reiterate that a more practical bill would have
been to enforce the use of interoperable protocols and (file format)
standards. that would, in my opinion, level the playing field between
competing open source and proprieta
http://linux.org.ph/articles/fossbill2006
On 12/4/06, Daniel Escasa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Sabi ni Mhac noong Tue, Dec 5, 2006 at 9:05 AM:
> Hmmm...
> can someone here provide a copy of the bill for our own perusal?
Kaloi posted a copy here, should be in the archives.
__
exactly. let us use real arguments and points in arguing our cause.
that being said, i would reiterate that a more practical bill would have
been to enforce the use of interoperable protocols and (file format)
standards. that would, in my opinion, level the playing field between
competing open so
We should not be too hasty in concluding that one who writes against our cause
has been paid to do so. I find it common that if one side gets to a writer
first and was convincing (assuming he has not already made his own
conclusions), the second side has to work doubly hard to explain itself.
Sabi ni Mhac noong Tue, Dec 5, 2006 at 9:05 AM:
Hmmm...
can someone here provide a copy of the bill for our own perusal?
Kaloi posted a copy here, should be in the archives.
--
Daniel O. Escasa
independent IT consultant and writer
contributor, Free Software Magazine (http://www.freesoftwaremag
Advertisers? I don't know that they'd care less. Besides, marketing
and editorial don't mix -- i.e., the marketing people don't dictate
what writers write.
But the big bosses losing money from advertising cares a lot. [Im just
not sure how much a paper earns from advertising alone.]
Anyways, j
Advertisers? I don't know that they'd care less. Besides, marketing
and editorial don't mix -- i.e., the marketing people don't dictate
what writers write.
Or the big businesses just hire PR men to influence opinion writers :)
--
sometimes truth is stranger than fiction
-bad religion-
http://
No, just one letter to the Editor will do, and I think Rep Casino's
covered most of the relevant posts. Besides, I'd give Pascual the
benefit of the doubt and attribute his column to ignorance. For all we
know, he might be open to Free Software, just that he needs to know of
the benefits.
Adverti
Hmmm...
can someone here provide a copy of the bill for our own perusal?
_
Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List
plug@lists.linux.org.ph (#PLUG @ irc.free.net.ph)
Read the Guidelines: http://linux.org.ph/lists
Searchable Archives: http://
We can all send "Letters to the Editor". But I do not know if that will work.
What WILL WORK is that we write the SPONSORS of Philippine Star and
tell them the kind of crap they are associating with. I think that's
the string we all ought to pull. Then they'll start to listen.
On 12/5/06, Daniel
Sabi ni Mhac noong Tue, Dec 5, 2006 at 8:27 AM:
I can't access that page anymore. I guess PhilStar removed it after an
uproar in the local blogosphere. LOL.
Not necessarily, maybe it was just time to take it down. In any event,
Pascual has his own site, and the article's still up at
http://www.
I can't access that page anymore. I guess PhilStar removed it after an
uproar in the local blogosphere. LOL.
On 12/5/06, Ariz Jacinto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 12/2/06, Marvin T. Pascual <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I can't stand it anymore. If you just read the postcript of Federico D.
>
On 12/2/06, Marvin T. Pascual <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I can't stand it anymore. If you just read the postcript of Federico D.
Pascual Jr. at http://www.philstar.com/philstar/NEWS200612032602.htm it is
unfair to us advocates of the F/OSS that we don't have any press releases
defending our adv
On 12/4/06, John Galt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Yes, I say pro-choice for that is the nature of a DEMOCRATIC society and a
DEMOCRATIC form of Government. As far I can remember, no government has
completely and absolutely regulated / controlled / mandated the use of
specific SW in both public and
On 12/4/06, John Galt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The use of "my clients" is just an analogy (*analogy is defined as a
comparison between two different things, in order to highlight some form of
similarity), to stress a point….that CHOICE is better than an all-sweeping
legislation to MANDATORILY
> "free and open source _software_"...hence technology.
Let's assume for a moment that F/OSS is a technology. Take Solaris
as an example. It is a technology from Sun Microsystems. When they
decided to release Solaris under an open-source license, did it change
the technology? I think not.
> Do not evangelize F/OSS. F/OSS is just an acronym for "free and open source
> software".hence technology. No need to be overzealous about it.
Why would you call clarifying the meaning of FOSS as 'evangelizing' and being
'overzealous'?
We who want govt to use FOSS want it to insist on a bundle
"John Galt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Yes, I say pro-choice for that is the nature of a DEMOCRATIC society
Democracies prohibit some things and allow some things.
Here's a good explanation of why governments should reject non-free software:
http://www.archive.org/download/Ifso_Federico_Heinz
On 12/3/06, Marvin T. Pascual <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello all,
I can't stand it anymore. If you just read the postcript of Federico D.
Pascual Jr. at http://www.philstar.com/philstar/NEWS200612032602.htm it is
unfair to us advocates of the F/OSS that we don't have any press releases
defend
t
Subject: Re: [plug] [OT] Calling out all media men and/or bloggers
> On the mandatory implementation of F/OSS within the Gov't, I am on the
side
> of pro-choice. Same with my clients, I always promote and recommend
> M$but also inform them of the alternative, F/OSS. Then I leave u
m: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of renlux
Sent: Sunday, December 03, 2006 7:28 PM
To: Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Technical Discussion List
Subject: Re: [plug] [OT] Calling out all media men and/or bloggers
We're not talking about your clients... We'r
> On the mandatory implementation of F/OSS within the Gov't, I am on the side
> of pro-choice. Same with my clients, I always promote and recommend
> M$but also inform them of the alternative, F/OSS. Then I leave up to
> them to decide which technology platform to use. If my clients want M$,
>
There is also a link for Philstar at PEX maye we can fire up a
discussion there I know a lot of members of this list are
pexersso calling all pexers.
http://www.pinoyexchange.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?s=&forumid=252
On 12/3/06, Daniel Escasa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Sabi ni Marvin
ember 03, 2006 2:26 PM
To: plug@lists.linux.org.ph
Subject: [plug] [OT] Calling out all media men and/or bloggers
Importance: High
Hello all,
I can't stand it anymore. If you just read the postcript of Federico D.
Pascual Jr. at http://www.philstar.com/philstar/NEWS200612032602.htm it
Moving to Plug-Misc because it's probably going to be a long
discussion that should not clutter up the technical list. I'd
suggest posting there instead of in the main PLUG list.
On Sun, 2006-12-03 at 14:25 +0800, Marvin T. Pascual wrote:
> I can't stand it anymore. If you just read the postcrip
Again, I say send me the press release and will get TechNews editor
of Manila Bulletin to approve it for release.
On Dec 3, 2006, at 5:32 PM, freelancer wrote:
I'm new in this loop. am a journalist and ubuntu user. Just want to
share some thoughts about
coming up with press releases or to
Dear Sir John,
It is not that we are fighting head-to-head with them. It is just a
matter of pointing out their misconceptions about FOSS and about the
bill.
I am urging Rep. Casino to publish a rebuttal and the community to do
everything it can to inform the media about FOSS. The thing
On Dec 3, 2006, at 5:18 PM, John Galt wrote:
On the mandatory implementation of F/OSS within the Gov't, I am on
the side of pro-choice. Same with my clients, I always promote and
recommend M$but also inform them of the alternative, F/OSS.
Then I leave up to them to decide which techn
I'm new in this loop. am a journalist and ubuntu user. Just want to
share some thoughts about
coming up with press releases or to just send individual feedbacks to
pascual or to manila bulletin. Feedbacks or
letters to the editor land in the letters section of the paper and
sometimes they're no
Hi, I hope we Open Source advocates be cool about this, we are not
politician to fight head to head with this people it will only cause more
dis-information regarding the open source if we do. People do not know what
is the difference between Open Source and the rest of Software license. We
who un
CTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marvin T. Pascual
Sent: Sunday, December 03, 2006 2:26 PM
To: plug@lists.linux.org.ph
Subject: [plug] [OT] Calling out all media men and/or bloggers
Importance: High
Hello all,
I can't stand it anymore. If you just read the postcript
This is an obvious challenge to us Open Source advocates. I am doing
my share via Manila Bulletin but it is only a once a week thing. We
need more - can we get sponsors such as IBM, Sun and Oracle to give
us funds for a half-page advert stating that these writers from
PhilStar and Inq do
Sabi ni Marvin noong Sun, Dec 3, 2006 at 2:25 PM:
Hello all,
I can't stand it anymore. If you just read the postcript of Federico D.
Pascual Jr. at http://www.philstar.com/philstar/NEWS200612032602.htm it is
unfair to us advocates of the F/OSS that we don't have any press releases
defending our
Hello all,
I can't stand it anymore. If you just read the postcript of Federico D.
Pascual Jr. at http://www.philstar.com/philstar/NEWS200612032602.htm it is
unfair to us advocates of the F/OSS that we don't have any press releases
defending our advocacies. Maybe it's about time to have our own
54 matches
Mail list logo
