Get rid of all URLs in an OpenOffice document

I just stumbled on a really neat trick that I have to share with everyone. Recently, I had to take an HTML document and format it for printing. The act of transforming an HTML document to ODF was remarkably easy, thanks to styles and the find & replace command. However, I learned that getting rid of a URL (link) is not a trivial as I would have liked — especially if you want to get rid of all of them at once!

Purely by accident, I stumbled on the fact that replacing the link address by a space is the equivalent of deleting the URL. Yay!

Thus, to (cleanly) remove all hyperlink in a document without loosing the format, here's what you need to do:

1. Select the entire document (CTRL+A or Edit->Select All)
2. Open the format character dialog (Format->Character)
3. Click on the Hyperlink tab
4. Type a single space in the URL field
5. Click OK!

Voila! No more URLs in the entire document. I've tested this with OpenOffice 2.4 and 3. Also, please note that this only works from the Format->Character menu command. The same does not work from the Edit->Hyperlink menu command.

Hope that's of use to someone out there!

J-F

The State of the Operating System Market

Here's exiting news. For the first time in 15 years, the Windows market share fell below 90%. On the upswing is Mac OS X with 8.87% of the market, and Linux at 0.83%. Source

These numbers are important for a number of reasons. For starters, Microsoft is gradually loosing it's grasp on the operating system market. Apple is doing a fantastic job of nipping Microsoft's monopoly.

As for Linux, you may noticed that it enjoyed 0.93% market share in August. I suspect this has been due to the release of UMPCs like th Eee PC. As the fad cooled down, chances are the sales cooled down as well. However, while visiting Future Shop on the weekend, I saw five UMPC with two of them running Linux. That's a 40% market share for Linux just there ;). As I predicted earlier, the rise of cheap computers will continue to hurt Microsoft as they are struggling to compete against free and open operating systems.

To put the numbers in perspective, here's a little report I put together with my trusty OpenOffice Calc:


A couple of interesting trends to notice.

Windows has been steadily loosing ground. This year alone, they've lost 2% of their market share. The year before that, 1.94%. Ouch! I can see why Microsoft was in a rush to deliver Vista. They needed something to help them regain the ground that they are loosing to other operating systems.

Apple has more than double their market presence over nearly five years. I personally attribute this to Mac OS X and Steve Job's marketing genius. Mac OS X is a true Unix operating system with a gorgeous interface slapped on top of it. This means that newcomers to computer have a system which is simple and inviting, while power-users have a solid Unix machine to hack. Personally, I feel that this has been a stroke of genius on Apple's part. Instead of re-inventing the wheel, or adopting Windows, they took advantage of FLOSS to custom build a rapidly growing operating system that is leaving Windows in the dust.

Linux is still barely a blip on the radar, but is still growing. Between this year and last year, Linux enjoyed a growth of 30%. I feel that this is important, since Linux is already well established on the server, but is struggling to gain traction on the desktop. I'm of the opinion that this increase is due to the UMPC explosion earlier this year. Linux is slowly by steadily spreading to the desktop.

What remains to be seen is how next year will play out. Windows 7 is due out in mid 2009, and sounds like Microsoft may actually get this one right. I don't expect to see the same level of anticipation as there was with Vista, since Windows 7 sounds like the Windows Vista that customers where expecting to get in the first place.

Linux has definitely penetrated the market. It is becoming more and more of a household term but retains a mythical aura. It has become one of those buzzwords that folks like to throw in conversation.

I'm a very poor prophet of the future, but I would like to predict some exciting movements next year. I believe that Mac OS X will continue to climb. I suspect that Linux may drop a bit, now that the UMPC buzz is dying down. Windows may regains some of it's share. I would even go so far as saying that Windows' market share will remain stable next year — that is, no significant drop or rise.

However, in the years to come, as cell phones are starting to overlap desktop computers in terms of functionality, I suspect that this is where we will see Linux shoot up. Reading about the buzz on Windows 7, I'm getting the impression that Microsoft is positioning Windows to be a competitor not to Linux or even the Mac OS X, but for the iPhone. Unfortunately, I don't think they are going the right way about it. Microsoft's vision seems to be focused on the tablet PC. Windows XP running on a tablet PC was introduced in 2001 by Bill Gates. However, seven years later, tablet PCs failed to make a dent in the market.

The reason tablet PC have not replaced laptop is due their limitation. As cool as they look, they are nowhere near as useful as a regular laptop. For instance, most do not have a keyboard, or a cover for the screen. Also, a tablet PC cost considerably more than a regular laptop. As for competing with cell phones, a tablet is simply too bulky to haul, and whip out whenever you need it. Thus, the tablet PC is not the best of both world. It's just an expensive toy.

I have no doubt that multi-touch displays a-la-iPhone will become de facto in a few years. But once again, Microsoft is playing catch-up since Apple has already invested heavily in the technology, and has already benefited from the fruits of their research. Linux is also multi-touch aware, and I'm looking forward to seeing what the community builds with the technology.

One more OS to note is OpenSolaris. When Sun Microsystem initially decided to open-source their flagship operating system, I was skeptical. My original impression is that Sun was hoping to breathe back life into the venerable but ailing SunOS before it sputtered and died. To my surprise, it looks like OpenSolaris could quickly become competition for the likes of Ubuntu. As much as I like Linux, I'm please to see solid competition on the horizon. I would go as far as to say that OpenSolaris is an operating system you may want to keep your eyes on.

ODF is the Winner: Microsoft

I'm kinda worried when Microsoft themselves declare that ODF is the clear winner in the OOXML-ODF war.

However, I think I can agree with Microsoft. The whole ISO/OOXML saga gave ODF a huge boost both in terms of popularity and credibility. This means that more people and organizations are aware of ODF than ever before.

I've long learns not to take anything Microsoft says at face value, so I'm a bit concerned about the statement. Maybe the statement is genuine, but I can't help but think that Microsoft has something up their sleeve. Until they display they ace, I'll keep my eyes and ears open.

The MS-OOXML Standard

Venezuela appealed OOXML as well, following the lead of South Africa, Brazil and India. Norway has also filed a letter of protest.

Though the news is interesting, what I find even more interesting is that it seems that even discussion of OOXML usually leads to Microsoft and/or Office.

The reason why I find this interesting is that no other companies are ever mentioned as direct benefiters beyond Microsoft. If the standard is truly a standard, why is only one company's name attached to it.

It's true that Microsoft created the standard, but why is Corel or Apple — supposed backer of the standard — never mentioned? Why are so many headlines along the line of 'Microsoft looses OOXML war?'

I don't know about you, but that tells me that there is only one company that stood to win from OOXML, and that's Microsoft. Let's face the fact: Microsoft did not create OOXML out of the goodness of their heart, or with inter-compatibility in their mind. OOXML was simply another tool in their lock-in arsenal.

Though ODF, MS-OOXML's so-called competitor was created originally with OpenOffice in mind, it has grown and evolved thanks to their own standardization process. Companies like IBM, Novell, Sun Microsystem and Google all participate to the development of ODF.

In the case of OOXML, who gets to participates in its future development?

Here's a hint

This is one of the many reasons I cannot support any Microsoft-controlled technologies or standards. No matter how 'open' they claim to be, Microsoft develops in secrecy, and announces specific features as they are getting close to completion. This ensures that any competing project continuously have to play catch-up with Microsoft. The standards controlled by Microsoft are pegs in the sand, and it's Microsoft that chooses where to put those pegs.

Who wants to play a game against an opponent who is also the referee?

Microsoft Windows for (Nearly) Free?

This is a follow up to Microsoft Windows for Free?

Shortly after I wrote this entry, a couple of interesting events occurred. As I predicted, Microsoft went ahead to compete with Linux on ultramobile PCs (UMPC) like the Eee PC. They are now offering Windows XP Home for $32 US. It's not free, but it's getting close to cheap. Actually, it's not free in either sense of the word, since Microsoft dictates what it considers a UMPC. The maximum specs are: 1G of RAM, 80G of hard disk space, single-core processor running at 1Ghz, screen size of 10.2 inches and no touch screen capability. Anything higher than that requires the vendor to buy Windows XP at their regular price.

That's fair. It's their product, so they can choose how it's licensed. However, I fail to see how they plan to compete with Linux on this field with those restrictions. Furthermore, the $32 US is only for Windows. This means that if you want Word or Excel, be ready to fork out more money. I'd be surprise that Microsoft would allow the vendors to ship Windows with OpenOffice prepackaged. Have fun playing Minesweeper!

With Ubuntu, I have a full fledged desktop with my office suite. The full install that takes up less disk space than Windows — And the $32 stays in my pocket.

Another interesting event is the fact that One Laptop Per Child (OLPC) recently announced that they would support Windows XP on the XO laptop. What a shame. To me, that alienates the whole concept of the XO — learning. How can they learn in a closed, controlled and censored system that greatly limits their freedom. Some of those children who are growing up in a dictatorship are denied yet another freedom. That is a massive loss for them.

Those poor children are denied freedom in the world of computing to further entrench the monopoly of an American company. I cannot help but wonder what goes on in the mind of folks who are more concerned with buying yet another, bigger yacht on the back of those children.

I remember in the early days that OLPC decided that the XO should only use free software (as in free speech). Thus, both Windows and Mac OS X were refused early on. Steve Jobs, president of Apple, went as far as offering Mac OS X for free (as in beer) for the XO, but was denied, since he would not free (as in speech) the software.

In their 'philanthropic' move, Microsoft is charging about $3 for Windows XP. Of course, that does not include Office or anything like that. Just Windows (Yay! Minesweeper!). Furthermore, to allow the XO to dual boot between Windows and Linux, the machine will cost an additional $7 to make.

Since Microsoft is all about their image, I was surprised that they did not offer Windows for free as Steve Jobs did with Mac OS X. I mean, $3 per copy isn't going to register a blip on Microsoft's revenue radar. So, why?

The only thing I can see is anti-thrust. Microsoft is having enough problems with the EU and the Department of Justice, that they may be reticent to offer Windows for free out of fear that it will be perceived as an anti-competitive move.

Though I may be painting Microsoft as a nasty, greedy ogre, we have to remember that they cannot force people to buy their products. They are doing a fantastic job of both painting their software as the 'only' option and — more importantly — hiding the true monetary cost of buying (and using) Microsoft software.

As long as the average consumer remains ignorant of both of those aspects, they may never realize that there are alternatives — much less of the need for those alternatives.

Thank you Microsoft!

Microsoft is considered by many open source advocates to be the arch-enemy of Linux and free software. I think it's fair to say that Microsoft fears the success of Linux and the free/open source movement. They are doing their best to make compete. However, free software is not their traditional competitor.

Because GNU/Linux is free (as in speech), and is freely (speech & beer) available to anyone, they cannot buy it out and close it as they have done with some past competitor. Because free software is developed by a (tightly or loosely knit) community that may or may not receive corporate sponsorship, they cannot hinder the development. Because the software is free (as in beer), they cannot compete in terms of price. Even Internet Explorer is more expensive than Firefox. Though it may be a 'free' download, remember that you must buy Windows to have Internet Explorer. Thus, as part of what you pay in Windows, you also get Internet Explorer. In other words, Internet Explorer is just another (unfortunately inseparable) component of Windows — not a free download.

Finally, Microsoft cannot compete in terms of freedom. Their End User License Agreement (EULA) determines what you can and cannot do with their software. In the free software world, the license protect both your freedom to use the software, and the freedom of the software.

So, how is a multibillion dollar corporation to compete against the penguin and the likes? FUD is their answer. FUD stands for 'Fear, Uncertainties & Doubt'. Or, in Microsoftspeak, 'Get The Facts.'

In the hopes of driving people away from Linux and free software, Microsoft created a site called getthefacts.com. The site is a direct attack on free software. Though the so-called 'facts' presented by Microsoft are an assault on both intelligence and reason, I think that the biggest looser of the site is Microsoft and a major victory for Linux. For starters, I think that any reasonably intelligent person understand that asking a Honda salesperson what they think of the Ford Focus over the Civic will not get them an unbiased, objective answer. Why should it be any different with Microsoft?

What MSFT may not realize is by setting up getthefacts.com, they have provided immense exposure to GNU/Linux and the free software movement. The website presented free software as a true competitor and alternative to Microsoft products. Folks that had never heard of Linux before are now becoming aware of it thanks to Microsoft. Furthermore, IT directors who rely on Microsoft to keep them up to date with the industry are kindly informed of alternatives to Windows and Office.

For this, I say Thank You Microsoft. There is nothing like corporate backing to promote free software. After all, it's time that Microsoft catches up with the market, and joins the ranks of Novell, IBM, HP, Apple, etc who are all users and backer of free software.

Microsoft Windows for Free?

How is Microsoft to compete? I mean, Mac OS X Leopard is $129 CAD, Mandriva Linux is about ~$80 CAD and Ubuntu is free.

Windows Basic, on the other hand is (GASP!) $199 CAD! And it does not even come with an office suite. You definitely get more bang for you buck with Ubuntu.

This brings me to two big questions.

The first one is: What exactly is Windows? I get a fat DVD which will eat a sizable chunk of my diskspace. It lack drivers for some older and even newer devices, and the closest thing you have to a functional word processor is WordPad. Whoopdidoo. I fell like I'm really getting value for my big, fat $200 dollars. Well, I guess that's Microsoft privilege to charge whatever the hell they want for their operating system. That's the beauty of having a near monopoly.

The second question I have is: How is Microsoft going to compete? Computer are getting dirt cheap. The Asus Eee PC is changing the way people think of laptop in terms of size and price. At the rate prices are going down, more than half of the computer's price will be for Windows Vista Basic. Even now, it is possible to buy a laptop at FutureShop for less that $500 CAD. How much of that $500 goes towards Windows?

At the rate things are going, Microsoft is going to have to dramatically reduce the price of Windows. I personally feel that $200 for a 'basic' version that allows me to surf the web and the privilege to install spyware, is highly unjustified. Especially when I can get a complete system that includes my office suite and development tools for practically nothing.

Or maybe the high price tag is to help support emerging markets? Since Microsoft is so altruistic, they will charge the develop world more to help subsidize Windows for the poor. What a nice robin-hoodish, humanitarian approach...except for the fact that the Robin Hood we are talking about here has more gold in his coffer than all the rotten sheriffs in the world. Furthermore, this Robin Hood is gladly charging the poor.

Once again, since they have a monopoly, it's only natural that they choose how much they charge. For years, it was easy to hide this Microsoft Tax, since a computer typically went for thousands of dollars. Now that computers are barely half a grand and that the price of Microsoft Windows keeps increasing, this tax is quite noticeable. People will quickly realize that an Asus Eee PC preloaded with Linux actually offers a lot more out of the box than the same Eee PC loaded with only Windows.

That brings me back to my first question: What the heck is Windows anyways? What am I paying $200 for?

Enjoying the Asus Eee PC

Having just received my Eee PC, I'm still getting familliar with it's capabilities. The keyboard requires getting used to, but I'm getting better. As long as I don't have to use the right shift key too much, I can almost achieve the same typing speed as on a regular keyboard ;) All joking aside, once you get used to the keyboard, it's actually quite pleasant.

I got the 8G model, which means that I have a whooping 8 gigabytes of 'hard disk' space. While this is tiny compared to a regular hard-disk, which is usually over 100 gigabytes for a laptop. However, for my needs, I think that 8G, or even 4G should be enough. Since the Eee PC supports SD cards, I'm using a 4 gigabyte card for my /home partition (for Windows users, think My Documents).

The pre-installed operating system is a custom version of Xandros Linux (which is based in Ottawa). Though the default is fine for most people's need, I wanted something that gave me more -- so I installed eeeXubuntu. I removed the default Gnome games, Abiword and
Gnumeric to save space, and them promptly installed:

• OpenOffice.org
• Java 6 SDK
• Eclipse
• C/C++ compiler
• Free Pascal & Lazarus
• Anjuta IDE
• jEdit
• Frozen Bubble
• Cedega
• Firefox 3
• (and a few more which I'm sure I'm forgetting)

I've got ~640M of space left (which ought to be enough for anybody) on my system partition. Not too bad, considering I've got a practically complete portable development system.

One of my goals is to get Morrowind working with Cedega. So far, no joy, but I'm not about to give up. I know some folks got it working, so I'm sure I can as well.

If you are going to install eeeXubuntu or Ubuntu, be aware of the Eee Wiki. One of the coolest trick I found is how to enable the ALT+F11 key to make a window take the full screen. That really takes advantage of the 800x640 screen resolution. There are many more cool tricks on the page. Check it out!

Software for Windows seems to take up much more room than software for Linux. If anyone plans to run Windows on the Eee PC, I would like to recommend they consider using Google Docs. It is a word processor, spreadsheet and presentation package that runs in a web browser like Internet Explorer or Firefox. Using Google Docs does not require you to install and special software. As long as you are connected to the Internet, you can use it. Futhermore, Google Gears should eventually allow you to run online application offline.

Actually, I'm using Google Docs one my Eee PC right now to author this article. So far, the Eee PC turns out to be a fun, yet useful machine. My wife is starting to strongly hint that I'm spending too much time on it. Oups! I think I should wrap up this article, and spend some quality time with her! See ya!

(Hum... I'm a bit disappointed with the Google Docs' HTML exporter. I wish it did XHTML)

Why Should You Consider Linux?

I'm a lucky man. I've married a beautiful woman with wonderful critical skills. She kindly pointed out to me that I may explain this free software and Linux thing, but nowhere do I emphasize the reasons why I think you should consider Linux.

Let me remedy that.

I believe there are many good reasons why an individual or a business should look at open source software and the GNU/Linux operating system in particular. In this article, I will address a range of potential users, from the end-user (everyday user) up to the IT professional. Some of the reasons will be technical, others social or even personal.

1 - It's Fun
I have a lot of fun with Linux, whether it's trying new software packages like Blender, Eclipse or even Alien Arena, trying a new distribution, or recompiling my kernel for the Nth time. There's so much I can do that I never get bored. Also, none of it is illegal, since the software I use is free as in free speech.

2 - It's Secure
Linux had security built into it from the ground up. Windows had security added long after it was created. Windows XP SP2 and Windows Vista are the first Windows versions to offer true desktop security.
One of the things I loved right away about Linux was the fact that applications cannot be modified or erased by end-users. In Windows, there's nothing stopping you from erasing part of the Microsoft Office or Windows folder. Yikes!
But it's not just a question of whether or not you are able to delete an application folder. The code, being opened, undergoes continual verification. Security problems are usually quickly discovered and corrected. It would be very difficult for someone to add a backdoor to any part of the code in Linux without it being noticed very quickly.

3 - It's Virus Free
Currently, there is not a single virus in the wild that can affect Linux. What I like about this is not just the peace of mind that it offers, but the fact that I do not need to install an anti-virus. You can if you really want to, but I generally tell Linux users not to bother.
(Having worked in the anti-virus industry myself, I'm of the opinion that anti-virus softwares are sometimes as obtrusive as the viruses themselves)

4 - It's (Mostly) Free
You can get a good thing for nothing. Open source software is an example of that. Linux is free (as in $$$) to download and use. The only financial commitment on your part is your Internet time, and maybe the cost of a CD.
Did I mention that you can then give the CD to whoever you want? That's right. It's not just legal to share Linux, it's also widely encouraged. For those that do not have a fast Internet connection, or who cannot burn CDs, Ubuntu offers free shipping of their excellent Linux distribution.

5 - Supports Many Hardwares
A few years ago, the situation was inversed. Windows had more drivers for more hardware. Now, it's starting to change. Windows is dropping support for older hardware, and according to the news, Microsoft will not install Service Pack 1 on Windows Vista machines that use unsupported drivers. Furthermore, when installing Windows and new peripherals, it is often necessary to hunt down and install drivers from the web. From personal experience, it is possible to plug in just about any hardware in Linux, and it's typically detected and ready to use.
Not every hardware is supported by Linux, but then again not every hardware is supported by Windows.
(Gripe: Many drivers in Windows are megabytes, if not hundreds of megabytes in size, and can take over your system. This is typically not the case in Linux — HP, I'm looking at you!)

6 - Supports Older Machines
Distributions like Vector Linux and Xubuntu work great on older hardware that simply will not run Windows Vista or even Windows XP. So, if you need to update from older versions of Windows but your current hardware does not support it, you could consider moving up to Linux instead.

7 - It's Stable
I have Linux machines hosting websites, mail servers, database servers, etc, live on the Internet. I kinda forget they exist because they just work. I rarely have to install patches or upgrade software.
How long have you kept your Windows machine running without reboot? Days? Weeks? Months? In my case, I've had servers up for over a year. Some almost two years. I've lost track.
Here's food for thought. In Linux, the only thing that forces a reboot is to load a new kernel. This is something I discovered the first time I installed Gentoo Linux. After I got my kernel compiled and loaded, I continued to build my machine — I compiled a GUI (Gnome), MySql, OpenOffice, sound driver and a whack-load of other stuff. Only after I had loaded my sound driver did I realize I never rebooted once, yet I had a fully loaded, fully functional machine. I was sold!

8 - It's Flexible
Why is it that Internet leaders like Google, Amazon and Wikipedia run Linux? I'm willing to bet that one of the reasons is its flexibility. Since Linux is free software, an organization can endlessly tweak it to suit its very specific needs. The success of Linux's flexibility is also noticeable in the fact that it is available anywhere from hand-held video-game consoles to cell phones to 85% of the world's super computers (Did you notice that Windows' super computer presence is barely 1%. Now, why would that be?).

9 - Free as in Free Speech
Following the idea of flexibility, we should not forget that Linux is free — as in freedom. It is your operating system. You can use it to do whatever you want. Don't be fooled into thinking that Windows gives you the same freedom. I challenge you to compare the terms of the GNU GPL to that of the Windows EULA. Decide which one gives you more rights.

10 - Community
There is a vast and expanding community behind Linux. It started as a community project that is now sponsored by large corporations like IBM and Sun Microsystems.
This community is visible in forums, newsgroups and mailing lists. Though the discussions can sometimes get nasty, most participants desire one thing: to continue the betterment of Linux. This community crosses all national and cultural boundaries.
To get a sense of the community, I invite you to take a peak at Ubuntu forums. You can freely browse without having to register.

11 - Altruism
Linux is developed by countless volunteers around the world. True, some developers make a living writing code for Linux, but without this mostly anonymous army of developers, testers, writers, translators and users, Linux would not be where it is today.
By using it, you are starting to free yourself from Microsoft's illegal grasp over the software world and are rewarding the community that helped bring Linux to where it is today. I'm sure there's nothing more rewarding to those countless individuals than to know that their contribution, minor or otherwise, is appreciated. Furthermore, you are encouraging freedom in the world of computing.

12 - Helping Developing Countries
I live I Canada, and I enjoy a wonderful quality of life, and I only realized how spoiled I am when I had a chance to visit Guinea in Africa. I realized that most folks who are considered 'poor' in my country would be considered quite wealthy in Guinea.
This said, not everyone in the world can (and should) pay Microsoft's tax. The added cost of Windows and Microsoft Office represents a large portion of a new computer.
OMGWTFBBQ!!!!!! I just went to the Microsoft website to check the price of Windows and Office for comparison. $259 for Windows Vista Home and $499 for Ultimate??? I must be living in isolation, because I can't imagine anyone wanting to pay that much just for fancy graphic effects (that Linux already offers). Half a grand for Ultimate? What is Microsoft thinking? I remember paying $99 for Windows 95 fourteen years ago, and I felt that the changes between Windows for Workgroup and Windows 95 was worthwhile. But $259 for a crippled and crippling operating system?
And if that's not bad enough, what about $539 for Office 2007? I don't even want to look at the price of Office Ultimate. (Ok, I did look at the price. Ouch!)
I'm sorry, but that's a total ripoff. This is what happen when a greedy company acquires not one but two monopolies. Do you realize how much of your taxes go to Microsoft? I shudder to think...

Ok, back to the point I wanted to make:

Helping Developing Countries - Second Try
Projects like the One Laptop Per Child are allowing children in developing nations to expand their horizons and join in the wealth of information that is available on the Internet.
I think that the XO is a wonderful piece of work, and I wish that even Canadian children could get a chance to work with it. One of the features of the XO I find amazing is the ability to view and modify the source code of the application they are working with. Talk about a total learning experience!
Such great philanthropic projects are only available thanks to free(dom) software like GNU/Linux, Open Office and many others. Not only is the software free as in free beer, it is free as in free speech.
By using Linux and participating in the communities, you help refine an already excellent product so that the whole world can take advantage of what computers have to offer.
Some Microsoft users point out that Microsoft and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation do participate in philanthropic projects — but why are they trying their darndest to stop the propagation of Linux to developing countries? It doesn't sound like they care much about what's best for those children to me.

13 - Popular
You have probably already used at least one device that runs with Linux or some open source software without realizing it. It's everywhere. The moment you hop on the Internet, the information that makes its way to your machine probably passes by half a dozen Linux machines along the way.
By the way, Asus, Dell and even Walmart have started selling PCs with Linux preloaded. Compare the prices with PCs that come with Windows preloaded. Do I need to spell out why those machines are less expensive?

14 - It's Easy
Yes, you read that correctly. You no longer need to be a hard-core computer programmer who is not afraid of bits and bytes to use Linux. Quite the opposite. Thanks to great projects like Ubuntu as well as desktop like Gnome and KDE, using Linux is as easy &mdash if not easier than Windows.
Now, just to make sure we understand each other: I'm stating that Linux is as easy to use as any other modern operating system. I'm not saying that Linux is like Windows. In other words, there is a learning curve — just like there is for Windows. To get you started, please read Is Linux Like Windows?

There you have it — some of the reasons why I'm a die hard Linux user, and reasons why I think you should consider Linux as well. If you are already a Linux or open source user, why do you use it? Did I miss anything?

In a future post, I would like to show you how you can try Linux risk free.

In the meantime, spread the word. It's time that everyone realizes that Microsoft is not the only player in the world of computers and that there are alternatives to their products. If you think that Microsoft is the best thing since sliced bread, please do your research. You may find that beneath Microsoft's glossy packaging, there's a lot of ugliness. But just to be fair, here's the same for Linux.

Hope you have a great day!

OOXML is a Bad Thing

Don't let Microsoft razzle-dazzle you. OOXML — the 'new' Microsoft Office format they are trying to push throught — is only good for Microsoft. Let me make that clear:

• It is not good for customers
• It is not good for business
• It is not good for developers

The only entity that is bound to win with OOXML is Microsoft. The reason is, there is already a office file format that is certified by ISO called ODF (Open Document Format). It is presently supported by OpenOffice.org, KOffice, and many other suites.
Why is ODF not supported in Microsoft Office? It's not because of technical limitation. Office supports file formats that are technically inferior to ODF like RTF and HTML.

Product and business competition is good for the customer. What would the world be like if you could not choose your car manufacturer (Ford, Honda, BMW, etc), your computer manifacturer (Dell, HP, Levono) or even your gas station? First of all, everybody would be riding the same car painted any colour as long as it's black. You could buy any computer that you want as long as it's a Dell. How little do you think Honda would charge for the Civic if it was the only compact available?

Microsoft has had an illegal monopoly in the world of operating system, office suite and web browser. In the past ten years, the changes that we have seen to their product has been minimal. However, as soon as the competition heated up, notice how much work Microsoft suddenly places in their product:

• Windows XP -> Windows Vista thanks to Mac OS X
• Microsoft Office 200X -> Microsoft Office 2007 thanks to OpenOffice.org
• Internet Explorer 6 -> Internet Explorer 7 thanks to Firefox

These innovations on either side were born out of free competition.

However, competing standards are bad, especially for customers.

Not good for Customers
Imagine a world where there are two CD formats. Two DVD format. Two gasoline types. How would the customer benefit from that? Well, the customer would have to make darn sure that they buy CDs that work with their CD players. Otherwise, they have spend money on a CD that cannot be used.
And what if that said customer purchased another CD player that is incompatible with the first. They can kiss their whole CD collection goodbye, since it won't play in the new player.
Sounds unlikely? It happened very recently where Sony & Microsoft (amongst many other companies) developed two standards: Blu-Ray vs. HD-DVD. Some customers spend thousands of dollars equipping themselves with HD-DVD, only to watch their market collapse, and their investment dissappear. Yes, they can still watch the movies their purchased, but no new movies will be released in HD-DVD.
Do you want the same thing to happen with your documents? Microsoft have changed the Office file format numerous time, and newer versions of Microsoft Office are sometimes unable to open files created in older version.
Who benefits here? The customer, or Microsoft. Hint: Who gets the money at the end of the day?

Not good for business
It may be a good news for developers looking for a job because now there are TWO file format to support. But what about the cost of doing business? Some clients or supplier may want to work with ODF. Others with OOXML. That pretty much doubles the development cost and time.
Of course, a company could alienate customers and suppliers by requesting a single format, but again, I don't think this is a sound solution.
There exists converters for one file format to another, but none are perfect. None can be perfect. Here's a simple experiment for you: Convert an MP3 to a WMA back to an MP3. What happens to the sound quality? It degrades. The same thing happens when we are converting from one office file format to another.

Not good for developers
I hate writing the same code twice. I hate solving the same problem twice. This is exactly what we are heading for.
I was quite excited when XML can to be. Before XML, I had to write so many file parser because everybody and their dog created a custom file format that had to be manually parsed. Now, thanks to XML and the DOM API (Document Object Model Application Programming Interface) to work with XML. I haven't wrote a single line of code to manually parse an XML document. Yay!
As a developer, I don't want to go back to the 'information stone age' by having to support multiple, incompatible standards. Thank you Microsoft for making my just so much more challenging. If Microsoft truly cared for us, ODF would have been supported in Office 2007.

---

So why is Microsoft pushing their format thought? The answer is simple: Governments and organizations are starting to standardize on ODF because it's an open ISO standard. Microsoft refuses to support ODF because that will mean that users can now choose between Microsoft Office, OpenOffice, StarOffice, KOffice, Corel WordPerfect Office, etc. You get the point. Microsoft does not want to give you choice, they want to remove choice. God forbid you should spend your money elsewhere!

OOXML is meant to work with Microsoft Office and no other office suite on the market. It's a bloated, complex format that is laded with legacy. Working groups world wide have made 3,500 comments and raised a number of technical issues found in the 6,000+ pages of specifications provided by Microsoft. Think about it: 6,000+ pages. That's not for the weak of heart. On the other hand, ODF has 700+.

On March 29th, ISO will announce whether or not OOXML becomes a dual(ing) standard with ODF. This choice is made based on votes made by technical groups in various countries around the world. Microsoft has openly stuffed and bribed some committee to ensure that the vote goes through no matter what.

Thankfully, some countries like India and Cuba voted no. I'm hoping that many more countries (including Canada, my home and native land) will vote against the broken, half-complete standard that would exists to benefit a single organization: Microsoft.

Please visit NoOOXML.org and Gloklaw.net for more information.

Is Linux Like Windows?

This is a follow-up to the article on 'What is Linux?'
I'll cut to the chase, and answer right away - no.
It is possible to set up Linux so that it looks very much like Windows, but under the hood, it is not Windows. We have to understand that Linux is very flexible and customizable. Someone with some technical knowledge, time and determination can install a Linux system exactly the way he or she would like. Those who are interested in truly learning Linux from the ground up can take a look at Gentoo or Linux From Scratch. This can be a great technical learning experience, but it is very technical.
If you would like a gentler introduction to Linux, I would heartily recommend Ubuntu.
Ubuntu is a free Linux distribution (distro amongst the initiate). A Linux distribution is a full-fledged, pre-packaged collection of software. Distros makes it easy and convenient to install and use the GNU/Linux operating system. Currently, Ubuntu is one of the most popular distributions due to its ease of use, stability and continued support. It is not the only popular distribution. If you are interested, you can also visit and/or try any of the following:

• Debian
• Fedora
• OpenSUSE
• Vector Linux

This is only a sample of some of the many distributions available. All of the above can be installed with minimal difficulty.
However, as mentioned above, Linux is not the same as Windows. It does not strive to be a carbon-copy of Windows, but an operating system that stands on its own merits.
Let's take a look at the important differences you will encounter between Linux & Windows.

No C:\ Drive
Yes. That's right. There is no A: drive, no C: drive and your DVD-ROM is not your D: drive. Your 'C:' drive is called the 'root directory.' Everything starts from the root directory. Also, where Windows uses the backslash (\) Linux uses the forward slash (/).
Here's a little cheat-sheet to help you get started:

C: drive	/
My Documents	/home/<<your name>>/Documents
Desktop	/home/<<your name>>/Desktop
Settings	/home/<<your name>>/
CD-ROM / DVD-ROM	/media/cdrom
USB Flash Drive	/media/<<drive name>>

Mac OS X users may recognize the above structure. Just replace /home/ by /Users/ and /media/ by /Volumes/.

Linux does not use file extensions
In Windows, a file ending with .doc is assumed to be a Word document and a file ending with .exe is an executable. In Linux, the extensions are usually meaningless, especially for executable files. So, firefox.exe becomes firefox, oowriter.exe becomes oowriter, and so on.

Files are case sensitive
In Windows, there can be only one file called letter.odt. It can be called letter.odt or LETTER.ODT, but it will be the same file.
In Linux, letter.odt, Letter.odt and LETTER.ODT are three different files. Furthermore, be aware that if you are asked to enter a command, it may be case sensitive.

No Viruses
Yes, you did read that correctly. There are no viruses in the wild for Linux. This means that you do not need an anti-virus. Should your friend or coworker kindly send you an email virus, you are immune. No need for McAfee or Norton.
I'm not saying that Linux will never have viruses, but I strongly doubt that it will develop the rich virus ecosystem that is present on Windows.

Windows Applications do not work on Linux
Many Windows applications have their equivalent in the Linux world. Actually, many of the applications used in the Linux world are becoming available in the Windows world as well.
Another cheat-sheet to get you started (free of charge!):

Microsoft Office	OpenOffice.org
Internet Explorer	Firefox or Iceweasel
Outlook	Evolution
Outlook Express	Thunderbird
Adobe Photoshop	The GIMP

By the by, most of these programs are available for Windows if you would like to give them a spin.

No need to download programs
In the Windows world, to install an application like WinZip, it is necessary to go to the WinZip.com website, download the setup executable, run the installation program and then we can use the program.
In most distributions, there is a 'package manager' that does the work for you. In Ubuntu, the Add/Remove Program takes care of everything for you. Just select the program(s) you would like, click Install, and it's done. That's right -- no need to run around the web, manually download setup programs and doing the installation yourself.


It's Secure
Windows XP Service Pack 2 and Windows Vista are starting to take security seriously. However, Linux has been written with security from the very beginning. This means that you don't immediately have access to every component of your system by default. Linux may refuse to show you a file or run a program. This is for security reasons.
Should you need access to a secure resource, you may be prompted for your password or the 'root' password. Be aware that once you enter the root password, you have complete control over your system. If you want to, you can render your system complete unusable. Note that you can do the same with Windows, except that Windows will not prompt you for your password.

It's Free
Free as in free beer. Yes, you can get something for (nearly) nothing. I add nearly because you need an Internet connection, and maybe a blank CD. Also, some of your time may be required.
Linux is also free as in free speech, and that's the part that is truly valuable for me. Windows is controlled by Microsoft — not by me. Mac OS X is controlled by Apple — not by me. Linux is controlled by — me! — and you!
That's freedom!
However, I know that too much freedom can be intimidating. That's where distros come in handy. They pick the most common option, and pre-package everything for you so that you get up and running quickly. However, once you get the hang of your environment, you can start tweaking stuff, and customizing stuff.

So, how does one get started with Linux? Well, stick along, and in a later post, I would like to show you how you can try Linux risk free!

In the mean time, you are welcome to continue your research. I would recommend Wikipedia as a great place to start. If you can, talk to other Linux users, and find out what they have to say. I personally think it's a great operating system, and I'm excited that you are interested in knowing more.

— and no, I don't make money selling Linux. This is a labour of passion and love.

What is Linux?

Talking to Microsoft Windows users I find the conversation usually goes the following way:

1. They spout out what little they know about Linux from a Microsoft perspective, trying to sound like they actually know what this Linux thing is.
2. There is a silence in the conversation.
3. I'm asked the question: 'Is Linux really that different from Windows?'

It's a simple question, but I find it a tough one to answer. What makes it difficult is the fact that most users equate GUI (Graphical User Interface) with the OS (operating system).
Before moving along, let's make sure that we understand the difference between a GUI and an OS. For starters, Windows is an operating system that includes a GUI. Mac OS X is an operating system that includes a GUI. Linux is an operating system that may or may not include a GUI.

So, what's an OS?
The simplest way to think of an operating system is in terms of hardware vs. software. The hardware consists of the parts of your computer that you can touch. Software is the logical, invisible part that makes your hardware do things. Software is simply a series of instructions that your computer follows. The software is typically packaged up in 'programs,' like OpenOffice, Microsoft Office, Firefox, etc...

Computers are really dumb and don't think. They blindly follow whatever instructions they are given.
This said, the operating system is a program that exists to control access to hardware and software resources like your memory (RAM), hard-drives, network, display, keyboard, mouse and so on.
Thus, a program like OpenOffice needs to ask the OS which keys were pressed on the keyboard. OpenOffice also needs to ask the operation system to draw letters on the screen. Behind the scenes, OpenOffice also needs to ask the operating system to allocate memory, load and save information to the hard disk, and send printing instructions to your printer.
The application communicates to the operating system using services or APIs (Application Programming Interface).

In turn, the operating system will rely on a 'kernel' to translate the service request to commands that the specific hardware of your machine can understand.
The following diagram displays the relationships between some applications and the operating system.

Let's go back to the original question: What is Linux?
The answer is: Linux is a kernel. No more. No less. It is the fundamental piece of code that controls the resources on your machine. Windows has a kernel. Mac OS X has a kernel. Pretty much every operating system has a kernel.
However, a kernel provides API that computer programmers use to write programs. End users do not interact directly with the kernel. To allow users to interact with their computer, a set of tools are provided with the operating system. In the world of Windows, you are familiar with the Start menu, the Control Panel and the Windows Explorer. These are some of the operating system's tools that one uses everyday to control the machine. These program are part of the operating system, but run on top of the operating system APIs. Such tools are sometimes called shell programs.

Linux is only a kernel. It does not include a shell or programs. However, Linux is most commonly packaged with a combination of free programs from another--as of yet incomplete--operating system called GNU. Because it borrows from the GNU project, you may hear people refer to the operating system as GNU/Linux.
With the combination of the GNU tools and the Linux kernel, we now have a complete operating system.
Well, it's complete in terms of functionality, but the average, everyday user would not consider it complete due to the fact that you do not have a GUI at this point. In other word, there are no graphics, icons, mouse, etc. Just 'cryptic' commands typed on a white on black screen.
So, the answer to the question: Is Linux like Windows seems to be no for multiple reasons.

1. The Linux kernel has comparable functionality to the Windows kernel, but exposes the API differently. Thus, programs written for Linux do not work on Windows, and vice-versa.
2. Windows is an operating system, while Linux is just a kernel (a part of the operating system).
3. Linux is free software that is open to anyone to see and modify. Windows is proprietary and is closed -- no touchy the kernel!

There are more differences to discuss, but I would like to finish this post with the following point to consider. Linux is not a GUI. In other words, it is not the program that controls what you see on the screen and how you interact with your machine. It is the glue that ties together your hardware with your machine. The nitty-gritty technical details are very different from Windows.

BUT, we haven't talked GUI. In the world of Linux, there is not one GUI, not two GUIs, not three GUIs, but dozens of GUIs available. Linux has been used anywhere from digital video recorders to supercomputers to your average, every day desktop machine (like mine ;)).
In future installments, I would like to discuss how Linux can look and behave in a fashion that is familiar to Windows users. However, I will continue to emphasize that Linux is not like Windows...and why that's a good thing!