Haiku OS!

I have been following Haiku off and on since about Alpha 1 release back in September 2009. Now as of this past June, Haiku has reached a new milestone, Alpha 3! But before we get into all the juicy details of Haiku, we first need to understand it's background and history.



Back in the mid to late 90's, there was a company named Be Inc. which produced a computer called the Be Box. This Be Box ran an Operating System developed at Be Inc. called Be OS. Be OS was and still is today considered by many one of the most advanced Operating Systems in existance. Be OS had features that no other OS had at the time or since. Be OS was a pervasive multithreading, Preemptive-Multitasking, Symmetric Multiprocessing OS with protected memory for user and system processes!



Be Inc. and Be OS enjoyed a small but loyal fanbase, many of whom are still loyal today! But the future of the Be OS was in jeapordy when Be Inc. went out of business. Since the Be OS was proprietary, it's users had no upgrade path, nor could they fork it. All seened lost when some loyal Be OS users decided to reimplement all of Be OS back in 2001. They wanted the new Be OS clone to be binary and source code compatible with Be OS 5.0. In this way they could continue using the native Be OS programs unmodified, without a recompile(if the source code was available). The Be OS clone was named OpenBeOS.



OpenBeOS had some trouble though! It used the name "BeOS" which was owned at the time by Palm Inc. The new project was facing a lawsuit if they did not change the name, they did. OpenBeOS was renamed to Haiku in 2004. One may ask why the name Haiku! What is a Haiku? Haiku is a form of Japanese 3 line poetry. The old BeOS used Haiku as their error messages! Sure beats cryptic messages by a long shot!



Haiku did not see a first Alpha release until 2009, followed by Alpha 2 in 2010 and Alpha 3 in June 2011. Now I will show some screenshots of my Haiku install. Please note, the background image was changed from the default which is blue with the Haiku logo.



This image is of the Haiku Desktop.







Next is a image of Web Positive (browser) file manager, About Haiku, and the menu























For some reason the last vertical inch or two of the screen did not get captured!



In case you were wondering, Haiku is licensed under the MIT license. While not copyleft, it is a GPL compatible Free Software license! What makes me drool when I boot Haiku is that it is far from being completed, but even still it is awesome and useable! One of my favorate features of a plethora of cool features in Haiku is the ability to see and change the priority of threads! Apart from the GUI which itself is different, yet familiar; Haiku looks and feels unique, simple, and easy(except for the lack of some features in Alpha 3 release). For more information about Haiku visit the following sites.



www.haiku-os.org

www.haiku-files.org

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haiku_OS

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Be_OS

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Be_Inc

Sony Vs. Hotz continued

I have been following the court case for the last few months since my last post. What I have read leaves me very concerned and angry! Just today I read a post about the Hotz case on wired.com. "Magistrate Joseph Spero in San Francisco granted Sony the right to acquire the internet IP addresses of anybody who had visited Hotz’s website from January of 2009 onward" This means that Sony will know exactly who has visited Hotz's website and possibly who to sue for using the PS3 hack! "Sony has also won subpoenas for data from YouTube and Google, as well as Twitter account data linked to Hotz, who goes by the handle GeoHot." This also means all content about the hack will be conveniently erased from the aforementioned sites.

"Respected for his iPhone hacks and now the PlayStation 3 jailbreak, the 21-year-old New Jersey man is accused of breaching the Digital Millennium Copyright Act and other laws after his website published an encryption key and software tools that allow PlayStation 'owners' to gain 'complete control' of their consoles from the firmware on up. Hotz has complied with a court order and removed the hack." (emphasis added) This paragraph made me sick! Why can't a "owner" of a PS3 gain "complete control" of their consoles? If they own it, they should have the right to do with it as they wish. It seems as if Sony believes they retain all ownership rights to their devices even after it has been bought by the consumer.

"The DMCA prohibits the trafficking of so-called “circumvention devices” designed to crack copy-protection 'schemes'." Yes, it is a scheme all-right! An evil one at that. "The law, however, does not require Sony to prove that Hotz received payment for the hack, which was designed to allow PlayStation 3 owners the ability to run home-brewed software or alternative operating systems like Linux." If I had a PS3, I would want to install Linux on it! To completely remove the PS3 firmware and all PS3 software. But since this lawsuit has come up, I will not get a chance to tinker with my own property! No wait, it is Sony's property, my bad.:(

Please consider the following. Suppose you were (by accident of course) watching pornography, and all of a sudden a message popped up! "The manufacturer does not allow pornography to be processed with this graphics card!" You would be confused and irate at the arrogance of the manufacturer to impose it's will on you! You would say "I own this card, and I should have the right to view any content I want!" And for the most part you do, except for the little problem of "Digital Rights Management" I like to call it "Digital Restrictions Management". But this is a subject for another post.

The real problem is Sony is not alone! Many if not most electronics manufacturers have the same view! What would happen if someone created a hack that allowed the installation of homebrew software on the X-box? Would Microsoft stand up for the property rights of the people who bought the hacked X-box? I doubt it. To me, this court case will decide if the people who bought the PS3 are the owners or if Sony is! This is not a security issue, it is a property rights issue! Everyone should be concerned and watchful regarding this issue of electronic property rights! If the courts can take that away, then watch out!

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/03/playstation-hacker-paypal/

Sony Vs. Hotz lawsuit!

I have known for a while now that Sony has prevented people from running GNU/Linux or any other "untrusted" software. About a week ago, I watched a video on the net about a group of hackers who had managed to install GNU/Linux on the PS3. As I understand it, every program is digitally signed by Sony using private keys to verify that the program is authorized. What the group of hackers did was to find a way to use these keys to digitally sign "unauthorized" software, including GNU/Linux. What this means is with this hack, users of PS3's can run GNU/Linux on their systems again! Just a few years ago, users of the PS3 could install GNU/Linux on their system in a hyper-visor mode, like a virtual machine. When Sony released a firmware update back in 2007 I think, this feature was disabled! This angered many in the GNU/Linux and hacker community.

Sony is using the "Digital Millennium Copyright Act" and the "Computer Fraud and Abuse Act" as the basis for the lawsuit. According to Sony, users do not have the right to modify their own property! A more frightening idea is that Sony actually believes that they retain ownership rights of their products, even after it has been sold! This is the ideology that Sony is portraying in this lawsuit!

If Sony wins the lawsuit, they would be setting the precedent that any and all hardware manufacturers can and should control the usage of their product and that they retain all legal ownership of their products! This should not be! The users of the product should retain any and all ownership rights to the product they bought. This idea of companies retaining control and ownership of their products is similar in many ways to "imminent domain", both being wrong and immoral!

Lets imagine for a minute that Hewlett Packard decided to sue people for installing any other Operating System than Microsoft Windows! Or say they decided to sue people for installing Open Office/Libre Office instead of Microsoft Office! Would we sit on our hands and do nothing while HP attempts to destroy user freedoms and property rights? I would hope not. I would hope that thousands of disgruntled users would be protesting at HP headquarters! Why not do the same to Sony? Maybe it is because many people do not see the Playstation 3 as a computer, but just a game console, a gadget. Regardless the reason, people should be demanding the right to use their device, which they own, and do with it what they will!

The problem is the hackers are not rich, and can not afford to hire lawyers like Sony can! So already, they are at a disadvantage. Our legal system is flawed, so flawed in fact if you have enough money, you can pay your way out of prison with good expensive lawyers! Someone needs to set up a legal defense fund for these people, to make sure they at least have a good defense team. Now there may be many of you who believe I have gone nuts for wanting to defend criminals! Who said they were criminals?

There is a misconception out there started mostly by the media, and proprietary software companies that hackers are bad people. Truth be told, hackers are responsible for the computer revolution, the Internet, and most all technological advances. Hackers are people who are talented at making something do it wasn't originally designed to do, kind of like making the PS3 run GNU/Linux! Crackers are people who break into computers and computer networks either for the pleasure or for money. Crackers are in a totally different class than hackers for the reason that they have different reasons and goals. Hackers do what they do for the community at large, while crackers do what they do for personal gain! Hackers usually hack for the benefit of all. they love finding out how something works and make it do different. This is O.K. if they own the device in question. And if they hack another's device, it is at the request and consent of the owner.

That is all I want to say about this matter at this time, I may write another post as the lawsuit progresses. Stay Free!

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2011/01/sony-v-hotz-sony-sends-dangerous-message

Things I have learned

I have learned many things since using Linux. The most important thing I learned by using Linux is summed up in one word, freedom! GNU/Linux is Free Software, in the sense that you have four essential freedoms. For more information about the freedoms, click the "Free Software Definition" link to the right. In the 4.5 years I have been using Linux, Free Software was the greatest discovery! I can use software, good software, without signing a End User License Agreement or EULA! When you install a proprietary software package, you must sign the agreement and must swear that you will never give a friend a copy of the program. That license is an immoral license. It takes away your freedom as the user of the software to use it however you wish, as well as severing you from the cooperative community entirely! Such licenses destroys to the utmost the social solidarity of your community.

Imagine you live in a free country where you have liberty to do whatever you wish. In this country, you can come and go and do whatever you want. In this country, you can vote, protest, and exercise your free speech. Now imagine that this country which I just described is a illusion! A country where everyone is brainwashed by the government through the mass media. everything you say, do, and think is controlled by the government. When you exercise your right to free speech, it is the government propaganda. When you go to vote, the votes are rigged. And when you decide to do something, you only do what the government says is OK! So it is with proprietary software! Most of us were brainwashed into believing that proprietary software is good and necessary to keep corporate profits up! This is a lie! Free Software can be bought and sold, as long as the GNU GPL license is followed and obeyed. This protects users from loosing their freedom. So I would hope that everyone refuses to agree to the EULA, and use Free Software only.

Back in December of last year, I bought a new HP notebook computer, but it had Windows 7 pre installed! I have to admit, i used Windows 7 for a while to see how it has evolved! The only positive thing i can say about it is that it looks sharp, but that is as far as I will go! There were many things I wanted to do in Windows that I could not do. Windows 7 is riddled with Digital Restrictions Management. I was so accustomed to having freedom to use my computer how I wish in GNU/Linux that i became spoiled! In GNU/Linux, when you watch streaming videos, the stream gets cached as a file to a directory called "tmp" so the video can be played. I could not do this in Windows 7! That is but one example of many of why proprietary software is evil and immoral.

Many people new to Free Software gets confused when they hear about "free ware". Free ware is proprietary software for the most part, that is distributed at no cost. The fact that you can get the software at no cost does not make the software "Free Software"! Remember, Free Software is free as in free speech, not as in free beer. It just so happens that you can get "Free Software" at no price. You can buy and sell Free Software, and it will remain Free Software because you still possess the freedom to use, study, and redistribute copies. You never have that right with proprietary software. This is the essence of what Free Software is. The only restriction on Free Software is when you distribute exact copies of the software, you must give the user access to the source code (recipe) and the GPL license, so they have the same freedoms as you. When you redistributed modified version of free software (modifications you made yourself) you must mark your changes, as well as what was stated in the previous sentence. In this way, no one can make changes to the software and make it proprietary!

It is hard to truly value freedom until you realize you have none. When you use proprietary software, you give up all freedom to use it as you wish. Visit all the websites that are linked to the right, there you will understand better, especially the "Free Software Definition" link. To some, all this will have sounded like talking about an issue that is not important. I believe that Freedom and Liberty can't be divided. You can't have some freedoms and liberties and not others. Now you know that proprietary software violates your freedom to use your computer how you wish. You also know that Free Software restores your freedoms! What will you do about it?

How I got started using GNU/Linux and Free Software

The particulars of how I discovered GNU/Linux is a bit vague, but I think it was completely by accident. I first started using GNU/Linux back in March 2003 when I bought Mandrake distribution 9.1. I was very excited about using "Linux" because I could not imagine how my computer could operate without Windows! It was as if I thought "PC's" were made only for Windows. I used Mandrake distribution for four months and then decided to go back to Windows XP, because the dial-up modem was a soft modem. Mandrake GNU/Linux was unable to use the modem! Back at that time, I was unaware that Free Software existed, and was ignorant about my rights and freedoms as a Free Software user.

My next experience with GNU/Linux was on February, 2005 when I discovered the Linspire distribution. It wasn't until December of the same year when I installed Linspire on my laptop. To be completely honest, the only reason I installed Linspire is because a computer virus corrupted an essential system file on windows, rendering it unable to boot! In the years I used Linspire, I repeatedly saw references to "RMS" on their forum! I later discovered that "RMS" is Richard Matthew Stallman, the creator of the GNU OS and the Free Software Foundation! For the most part, Linspire GNU/Linux users subscribed to the Open Source movement, and did not associate themselves to the ideals of Free Software. Linspire was not liked in the Free Software community because it included non-free software! During this time and afterward, I tried many other GNU/Linux distribution including Debian, Damn Small Linux, Fedora, etc. I used Linspire GNU/Linux until 2009.

In the summer of 2009, I switched to Linux Mint distribution. I liked it because it had features that I thought was cool and innovative! While the main version includes non-free software, the community version does not! While I am using Linux Mint now, I am seriously thinking about switching to Trisquel GNU/Linux, a fully Free Software Operating System. It includes absolutely no non-free propietary software! This means there is no flash player or any other non-free multimedia codecs. While this will limit the functionality of the Operating System, the new HTML5 standard will soon render it moot! We all know how bad youtube videos are. This is because Youtube encodes the uploaded videos in the .swf flash codec, which is non-free!

That is my story of how I got started using GNU/Linux

What is Open Source?

There has been much debate in the Free Software community about the term "Open Source". It has become a dividing issue that has fractured the community into two different groups! Although the Open Source community says it is the same as Free Software with a better sounding name, the truth is quite the opposite! The Open Source movement started back in the mid to late 90's as Free Software advocates and developers started to entice corporations and businesses to accept and use Free Software. However, the name "Free" in Free Software did not set well with the corporations.

Because if this, many in the Free Software community wanted to change the term "Free Software" to something more palatable and acceptable to businesses. So, after a while, they created the "Open Source definition" which defines what Open Source software is. People in the Open Source community will emphatically say that Open Source Software is really Free Software, and for the most part it is. Most Open Source Software is Free Software in that it is licensed under the GNU GPL, the Free Software license. The area of conflict is not the software per se, it is the mindset of the Open Source community!

As a whole, Open Source is about how good the software is or can be simply because the source code is available, or open. However, that is but one part of the equation! Open Source only looks at the usefulness, reliability, security, and efficiency of the software, but does not value the Freedom the software and the community provides! This is not to say that Open source is all bad, most of the open source software actually is Free Software because it is licensed under a Free Software License like the GPL. It just misses the mark of the moral, and ethical standards of Free Software! Like I said in my previous blog, the Freedom and the ethics of Free Software is more important than the software itself, and the Open Source people just can't see that!

What I would like to see happen is the unification of the Free Software Community and the Open Source community! It is strange that Linux, and other software developed by the Open Source world is free software, but they don't affiliate themselves with the Free Software community! Many people say that it is Richard Stallman and the Free Software movement who needs to compromise and come to the Open Source fold. But since Richard firmly believes in computing freedom, he will never bend. If the Open Source Community would strongly affirm that the ethics and freedom of Free Software is of supreme importance and reject the use of proprietary software, I strongly believe that Richard Stallman would accept the Open Source movement with open arms! Until that day comes, the Free Software movement and Open Source movement will continue to be estranged brothers!

What is Free Software

When you hear the word "free" what is the first thought that comes to mind? To many people, lack of price is the first thought upon hearing the word. But "free" like many words in the English language, is a word with dual meanings. The word "free" also means freedom, liberty, and loose. Free Software is software that sets its users free from the dictates of programmers and software companies like Apple and Microsoft. In short, Free Software is software that enables you to compute in freedom and in harmony with your community. There are no restrictions on you when you use Free Software, but if you want to make copies for a friend or neighbor or modify another's work and/or redistribute it, there are a few restrictions. For more information, click here-> http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html

Free Software was the idea of a man named Richard Stallman, who was working in the MIT artificial intelligence lab in the 1970's. In the early days of computers, software was shared around between people, and there were little or no "proprietary" non free software. But as the 70's came to a close, more and more computers used non free proprietary software. This new development model began to seriously hurt the innovation at the MIT lab. In order to use the best computers of the day, they were forced to use propietary UNIX OS. When problems were found, they could not create a fix, even if it would be to AT&T's benefit, because the source code was locked up! So, this put Richard Stallman in a real moral dilemma. If he chose to continue using computers, he would be using proprietary OS. But if he did that, he could no longer help his neighbor, because he could not give copies of the software to others. Mr. Stallman then concluded that non free "proprietary software is immoral in its creation and distribution!

One day he realized that he could create a Free Software OS and invite others to form a community and free their computing! Soon after, he started the GNU project (Gnu is Not Unix) and the Free Software Foundation. GNU is the name of the Operating System that Stallman and the Free Software community developed. GNU is commonly and mistakenly known by another more popular name, Linux. Actually Linux is only the kernel, the heart of the OS that orchestrates the rest. So it is more properly called GNU/Linux because the GNU part is such a larger part of the OS than the Linux kernel. The Linux kernel was developed by Linus Torvalds in 1991. At that time, the kernel was the only part of the GNU OS that was still missing. When Linus released his kernel, there were people who took parts of the GNU system and added the kernel, and without knowing it, filled in the last gap in the GNU OS!

That was then, and this is now. The GNU/Linux system has become a symbol of what free software can do! Many people who are in the GNU/Linux world like to thank Linus, and others for what it has become, but Richard Stallman deserves a great big thank you! If you are not using a Free Software Operating System, you are giving up essential freedoms, and are legally unable to be a good neighbor if a friend asks if they can get a copy of your program. Programs are made in a similar way as are foods, but what would you do if Betty Crocker gets a patent on cookies. You would be unable to make your own cookies because recipes for cookies are not free for the public anymore! If you made cookies, Betty Crocker would sue you for piracy for eating the cookies and giving your friend some! An even worse fate awaits you if you distribute the recipes! A similar problem exists for software programmers.

Some of you will say, "But proprietary software is more powerful, stable, reliable, secure." but that can be debated. Free Software is software that has the source code (recipe) available. That is one of the restrictions of Free Software, the source code must be made available to the user when distributing it. In this way, the user has the same freedoms as you! Since the source code is available to all, more people get to see the stability and security bugs in the code. Hence, the problems gets fixed faster. In the proprietary development model, only a few people see any particular part of the source code, so there is longer time between fixes. But all this is only but the icing on the cake, the important part is the Freedom and the Community. Freedom and the Community, even more important than the software itself, must be maintained and defended! Is GNU/Linux powerful, stable, reliable, secure? Yes. But more important than all of that, it is free, in every sense of the word!