Skip to main content

+1 to Opensource

This post is about a philosophy, nothing more. I had tweeted the title months ago. I thought that I'd better write a post too.

Apart from Windows, my antivirus and Microsoft Flight Simulator X; you'd be hard-pressed to find any proprietary software on my computer. I like to use FOSS everywhere.

Call me a geek, my reasons for using FOSS are simple. I just cannot pay for all the proprietary software I'd require. Consider that Adobe Photoshop costs close to $ 1000, Lightroom costs $ 100, Photomatix costs the same, MS office costs around $ 500. I cannot pay so much.

But this does not mean that I compromise on quality. As I've recognized in my various experiments with FOSS, free does not mean poor quality. Why is FOSS so successful? Simply because it is open, in that everyone who uses it can modify it to suit their needs.

Let's consider an example. Say you are interested in a word-processing software (assuming you are one of the many idiots who do not use LaTeX. You download a free word processing software like LibreOffice Writer, but are unhappy with the way it handles ligatures. If you are a programmer, you are able to easily modify the software so that it handles ligatures better. As this is a modification that improves the software for many, it is incorporated into the next release of the software, which happens in a few weeks time. That way, FOSS software continuously improves, and the improvements are linked closely with user demands, because more often than not, the users are also the developers of the software.

With the large pool of software out there, FOSS seems a good way out. Suppose one software handles a particular task very well, and another some other task, and a software is needed which will handle both; since the source codes are available, software development becomes easy.

Why, then, is open source software considered inferior to its proprietary counterparts? Well, one reason is the popular (though erroneous) perception that anything free will be of inferior quality. The other reason is the fact that since open-source software is made by users who are developers (in other words, geeks), it often sucks when it comes to UI design. Consider that the developers and many of the users are people who prefer to use the terminal for every task.

As an example, consider the software qtpfsgui, or Luminance HDR. Just try to remember the name. It is a software for creating high dynamic range (HDR) images. Now, the developers very kindly decided to leave all the decision making process onto the users, i.e. they have offered a wide range of algorithms at the user's disposal. Which is a good thing, cause it offers much more control over the image rendition. However, bombarding a user with the names of the algorithms as <author, year> is not going to go down well with photographers, many of them not comfortable with even the basic laws of reflection. Moreover, it asks for exact parameters required by the algorithms, of which a user will have no idea unless (s)he has read the corresponding scientific paper, an onerous task.

The fact that FOSS is superior to proprietary software was driven home when I tried to create a panorama. My camera manufacturer had provided me with a proprietary software, which cost around $ 80, which of course was added to the cost of the camera. Yet, when I tried to create a panorama of the Niagara falls, as seen from Skylon Tower, because the panorama was taken from a higher vantage, looking down, perspective distortion kicked in, and the panorama turned out curved, so that I could never create a 360° panorama. I then used Hugin, and the results astonished me. I had never thought that a free software would provide such quality. The resulting panorama is here.

This was when I tweeted "+1 to opensource"

Why do I use open source? Simply because it's affordable, reliable, and gives me a chance to give back to the community, something which I plan to do very soon. For those of you who know to code, I would strongly recommend using and improving open-source software (after all, that is the freedom we've been struggling for) so that every one will like using FOSS.

Popular posts from this blog

Progressive Snapshot: Is it worth it?

I turned 25 last year, which in the highly mathematical and calculating eyes of the US insurance industry meant that I had suddenly matured into a much more responsible driver than I was at 24 years and 364 days of age. As a result, I expected my insurance rates to go down. Imagine my surprise when my insurance renewal notice from GEICO actually quoted a $50 increase in my insurance rates. To me, this was a clear signal that it was time to switch companies.Typically, I score really high on brand loyalty. I tend to stick with a brand for as long as possible, unless they really mess up. This qualified as a major mess up. As a result, I started shopping for insurance quotes.Two companies that quoted me significantly lower rates (30%–40% lower) were Progressive and Allstate. Both had an optional programme that could give me further discounts based on my consenting to the companies tracking my driving habits. Now, I am a careful driver – I hardly ever accelerate hard. I hate using the brak…

Build those noise cancelling headphones

So, here's another DIYLet me start by putting the cart before the horse. I shall start with the credits. This project was done while I was working on my Electronics Design Lab, along with my friends, Srujan M and Indrasen Bhattacharya. The work would not have been possible without the generous help received from the staff at Wadhwani Electronics Laboratory, who ensured that the only thing we did right was to leave the lab on time. This project would also not have been possible without the guidance of our dear and learned professors. It would probably have just about become additional dead weight on the head.Enough with the credits, now, I need to dive right into noise cancellation and how it works.The essence of sound is a pressure wave. The pressure wave, when incident on the eardrum sets into motion the complex mechanisms inside the ear, and after a long path, rather like the Cog advertisement, ends up making some nerves vibrate. The nerves send electrical signals to the brain, …

Reading List, December 2017

Brian Merchant, How email open tracking quietly took over the world, in Wired, 11 December 2017. [Online]: is no longer a secret that every website you visit silently tracks you in an effort to maximise ad revenue. What is less known is that emails also track you, through the use of tracking pixels and redirect links. These techniques were used by spammers and legitimate companies alike when creating newsletters or other mass email, in order to figure out their reach. What’s happening now is that private people are also using these techniques in order to create invisible and intrusive read receipts for email, which is incredibly frustrating from a privacy point of view.My solution to the tracking woes? I only open the plain-text component of email, which gets rid of tracking pixels entirely. Redirect links are harder to beat, and I don’t have a good solution for this.Dan Luu, Computer latency 1977–2017. D…