Re: [seul-edu] SEUL Licensing (was: Our presence at trade shows)

[Manuel Gutierrez Algaba <irmina@ctv.es>]

On Thu, 31 Aug 2000, Hilaire Fernandes wrote:
>  > > suite of educational programs. This is precisely because the core can
>  > > be (re)used to support a wide variety of other endeavors, whereas the
>  > > educational software suite is relatively limited in scope.
>  > 
>  > I agree with this, particularly because educational software _is_ limited in
>  > scope.  More below.
> 
> Wrong. In education they are the main scope.

Of, reusing is always a goal.  In fact, if we had "raw data" in
XML about : Words, descriptions... We could feed them into 
some games, for example my Crosswords stuff.  But, even so,
reusing code is always a good thing.

>  
>  > > The motivation for trying to get any high-quality software available is
>  > > a short-term solution. The overall thinking is that if we demonstrate
>  > > that it's useful, then truly free software will spring up to replace it
>  > > (particularly if we maintain an environment that encourages that).

I think the lack of support (and I speak of myself) is huge.
People support very good ideas and very common things (like 
painting programs or arcade games ). Sometimes would be wiser
 to invest in other "loser" games. I cannot agree about "Darwinism"
in free soft. Sometimes the difference is the lack of time
and support. 

We have "Open Source" programmers , but we don't have 
"Open Source" users, that is, people who feeds back , people that
pays no money but support and "raw data". 

>  > problem is that as Bill said, there's little incentive for anyone not deeply
>  > philosophically committed to free software to develop and more importantly
>  > maintain free software in a small niche.  Most of the GPLed software from
>  > large companies are things that they can sell maintenance and support
>  > contracts for, gaining a revenue stream thereby.  For games, educational
>  > software, most home applications, and the like, once the program is installed
>  > there's little or no contact with the producer.  Hence no incentive other
>  > than personal interest in maintaining the programs.

I completely agree, and no big company invest in creativity, but
in benefits.

>  
> It's a matter of imagination and creativity to create viable economic
> model for such development. 

No, creativity usually lacks time and power. 

> > 
>  > We can all point to outstanding exceptions to this idea, but they are just
>  > that--exceptions.  I'd much rather see reasonably priced commercial
>  > educational software for Linux than poorly or not-at-all maintained free
>  > equivalents.

Ok, regretfully, commercial educational software is expensive,
and it can't be cheap because otherwise it can't exist as commercial.

>  Of course, I'd like to see well-maintained, innovative, useful
>  > free educational software most of all, but I'm not going to refuse evrything
>  > else while waiting for it.

The question is lack of support. Most of the other GPL progs
were built by programmers to give themselves useful tools (emacs, gcc,
Linux, gimp...). But, programmers doesn't need educational progs
to work every day. Then , occasional programmers ( teachers ,...)
usually lack technology and time. 

It's a lack of commitment and support for the few programmers who
had the technology and will to do something educative. 

>  
>  > I think that if we're thinking about "courseware" (pedagogical software) we
>  > may want to investigate creating one (or a few) lesson presentation engine(s)
>  > and GPLing it (them), then creating the lessons ourselves or allowing
>  > teachers or companies to create and sell such.

Again, the interesting part is the "raw data", the lessons. The engines
are always relative easy to do, or they already exist!

>  
> This one way to think about alternative financial resource.

About financial resource, my experience says there's two:
- A la Microsoft. 
- A la Richard Stallman

Other experiments, like subsidies from *linux*org sites and so on
are a flaw or a fake. 

>  > 
>  > There's an axis between total pragmatism and total idealism.  At one end, any
>  > means justify the end; at the other, the means _define_ the end.  We all
>  > exist at some point along this axis.  For me, the end is using Linux to
>  > enhance education (a vague goal, I know).  The means include being inclusive
>  > of anyone or any group that sincerely and honorably wants to work toward a
>  > similar end.
> 
> Do you think Linux, GCC, GDB, Gnome, Kde, Gimp will have come true if
> RMS didn't push so hard for 16 years ?

No. We need fighters. Or to devise a strategy. 

> 
> 

Regards/Saludos
Manolo
www.ctv.es/USERS/irmina    /TeEncontreX.html   /texpython.htm
/pyttex.htm /cruo/cruolinux.htm ICQ:77697936 (sirve el ICQ para algo?)

  QOTD: "I used to be lost in the shuffle, now I just shuffle along with the lost."