A recurring theme in this column has been that the inside of the box matters. If we simply turn on a word processor, access a database, link to a network, or play a video with no concern for how and why it was put together, we can make ourselves and our students vulnerable. This point has been highlighted recently with the revelation that millions of computer users inadvertently open their files to any user of the Web through file sharing. The underlying means by which computers represent and transfer data have important implications regarding who has access to new technologies. Even the tools we use to edit documents and make presentations encode assumptions about texts we may not accept, but nevertheless adopt, when we use them uncritically.

One such technology is called “free software.” This may sound like a bargain way to use computers, but free software can actually cost money. What makes it free is that the user can run the program for any purpose; study how it works; and adapt it, redistribute it, and release improvements. Free software (GNU Project, 2001) is closely related to “open source” (the topic of the May 2000 Technology Column), though not exactly the same. Understanding what it means and its implications for access and use of new technologies is an important component of the new literacies. There are immediate practical implications for schools and other literacy centers, as well as individuals, in terms of both economics and control.

Michael Brunelle, my coauthor this month, was an undergraduate at the time he prepared the first draft of this column. He is now a graduate student in Library and Information Science, with interests in community networking, public access, and free software.

Bertram C. Bruce


Back to menu

Issue

Developing new literacies with free software

What sort of knowledge and experience is necessary for a person to be considered literate? Is literacy something to be achieved, or is it a continual process? As we struggle to understand and promote literacy in an increasingly “informated” world, we are faced with important choices about how we create and communicate. If our larger concepts of knowledge are constructed around the use of certain tools and techniques, we should consider the implications of the choices that we make when we teach and learn.

Context

When people turn on a computer, they expect to see a Microsoft logo. Because of the practical ubiquity of the software, there is tremendous pressure from companies, leaders, and what can often seem like society itself for every computer to run Microsoft Office, preferably on an Intel-powered, Windows-based machine. While many people may be more comfortable buying name-brand software or benefit from using exactly what everyone else uses, Microsoft does use its market position to penetrate other niches, slowly replacing programs from a diversity of sources with Microsoft equivalents and stifling competition (Wilcox, 2000). A typical organization is likely to be an almost exclusively Microsoft-driven enterprise, from servers to workstations to handheld devices.

Numerous problems are associated with relying on any homogenous network. The Internet works well, in part, because of its diversity and redundancy. Microsoft’s success on the desktop would seem to increase the likelihood that organizations will choose Microsoft products for other services, such as Web and e-mail services. There are risks involved with relying on such a network. The software has several potential security vulnerabilities, and there have been several episodes in which malicious viruses and worms infiltrated Microsoft servers and e-mail clients because of these weaknesses. Despite such problems, and despite the budgetary demands of keeping commerical software up to date, most organizations do not consider alternatives, because computers should run Windows. Right?

Alternatives do exist, and always have—alternatives that can provide improved stability, reliability, flexibility, and cost-effectiveness, all while encouraging a broader commitment to help others. When AT&T changed the conditions of use for its Unix operating system, the Berkeley Software Distribution (BSD) project created a free version, available for anyone to use. In the past few years, the GNU/Linux operating system has emerged to present an increasingly real challenge to commercial software. Most of the servers that power the Internet today are run by free software or software based on open-source projects. One program that demonstrates the usefulness of free software is the Apache Web server, which accounts for over half of all Web servers. For a comparison of Web servers, see the Netcraft Web Server Survey.

Retrospective

When computers were still a new technology—a research tool—people and companies shared software for practical reasons. When hardware manufacturers sold products, they basically gave away the software, allowing access to the source code because its value was intrinsically linked to the hardware. It was in the interest of programmers and researchers to share software to control printers and other devices, exchange bug fixes and other useful bits of code, and generally be very open with their work because cooperation was the best way to make a computer do what they needed it to do. Most people learned to program because they needed to make the computer do something specific (e.g., analyze data, solve mathematical problems).

With the rise of the personal computer and numerous other industry developments, the technology market has changed considerably. Few computer users want or need to write their own software because software has become a product, taken for granted and often used for relatively simple tasks. There is no need to know how a printer driver works or how memory is managed by an operating system. This is certainly not an unwelcome development. Software should be easy to use and should meet the demands and needs of the users. But there are ramifications to the transformation of software into a commodity whose source code is no longer available to users.

The modern free-software movement exists for the simple reason that some programmers felt that the licenses imposed on users by companies selling software were too restrictive. Some people wanted to fix their own problems, some people were curious, and some people felt they were unfairly shut out of a process in which they had previously been intimately involved. Sometimes market failure is all that is necessary; operating systems like BSD and Linux rose in popularity and robustness because people wanted to use and experiment with Unix, but they were unable to pay the high licensing fees that AT&T was asking for its product or unable to forfeit certain rights in order to gain access to the source code.

Problems and opportunities

Relying on Microsoft programs creates a user base that becomes ever more reliant on Microsoft products, trapping users in a cycle of dependence. While retraining people to use a new software environment can be costly, the long-term benefits can be great. Investment in free software is essentially an investment in human capital, rather than in a product doomed to be either replaced or discarded within 5 years. Because recurring upgrade costs are eliminated due to the free distribution of the software, actual cost is limited to maintenance and support functions performed by actual people. The money that would have been spent on software could be reinvested in training programs or other organizational initiatives. Rather than contracting with outside companies or training staff to remain dependent on commercial products, money could be spent on people that can help other people learn how to use software more effectively in their own jobs.

It would be difficult to make a direct correlation between using Linux and developing a more thorough understanding of what programs do, how the Internet works, and so forth simply because the people that tend to use Linux are the people that have developed this sort of understanding anyway. However, it could be argued that learning to use computers with an open and flexible operating system like Linux offers people a more portable and flexible skill set and helps people break the cycle of consumption and dependence that ultimately reinforces a limited and limiting paradigm for information technology. Open-source software promotes computer literacy by allowing the user free access to the inner workings of the system.

Most computer users have a limited set of skills with only a few familiar applications (e.g., Word, Excel, or Outlook). Indeed, most people still learn how to use computers by repetitively using specific applications. Upcoming versions of free alternatives to these applications, such as Ximian’s Evolution groupware program and the OpenOffice suite, are reaching a point where the difference in quality and usability is not significant to the average user. The real difference is that these programs are free for anyone to update and support and cost nothing to purchase.

Significance

If free speech and free press are essential to the development of a general literacy, then free software can promote the development of computer literacy. Free software represents a different way of developing software, but the principles at the heart of the movement intertwine with a worldview not limited to computers. Free software allows people to fully participate in the processes that govern the way they work and play. Free software offers choice—not just between products, but a fundamental choice at the level of code.

Free software allows anyone access to the most basic elements of a program and permits their free modification. Free software offers a new model for engagement with knowledge—a surprising model, considering that society often seems to be dominated by corporations and other institutions that dehumanize some of the most important aspects of life. Free software can help put people back into the process by remaining as inclusive as possible.

The chaos of the Internet is always changing, always creating new patterns in data and lifestyles. Often, these patterns mirror the structures and institutions of the rest of the world: The same powers dominate, the same disparities remain, the same problems persist. On the Internet, however, the structures of the real world are even more susceptible to competition from people interacting in novel and distributed ways. Free software is one means for people to work cooperatively and build systems that encourage greater understanding and greater freedom, and we should strongly consider integrating this model with our educational programs.

Back to menu

Webpage of the Month

It has been said that no language is difficult to learn if it is the first one you hear. All of the computers in the offices of the municipal government of Largo, Florida, USA, run free software (specifically, the K Desktop Environment on Linux terminals), and the municipal employees don’t seem to mind not having Microsoft products on their desktops. One of the arguments against making the switch to free software is that average users won’t be able to figure it out. This case study demonstrates how a well-designed system can save a lot of money in licensing costs and keep people working productively. The site also includes a discussion of the story.

Back to menu

Glossary

Free Software—software is considered free if users can run the program for any purpose, study how the program works (by looking at the source code), adapt it to their needs (by modifying that source code), and freely redistribute modified or unmodified copies to anyone, all without having to ask or pay for permission.
Back

Unix—a multiuser, multitasking 32-bit operating system written in the computer programming language C and developed in the late 1960s at AT&T’s Bell Labs; later development split between BSD variants and AT&T’s own System V.
Back

BSD (Berkeley Software Distribution)—an offshoot of the ill-fated Unix development collaboration between the computer-science department of the University of California at Berkeley and AT&T. BSD Unix is the core of free operating systems like FreeBSD, NetBSD, and OpenBSD, as well as commercial operating systems such as Sun’s Solaris and Apple’s Mac OS X.
Back

GNU (GNU’s Not Unix)—a “Unix-workalike” development effort by the Free Software Foundation headed by Richard Stallman.
Back

Linux—common name for GNU/Linux, an operating system based on the Linux kernel and the GNU tool set that has been the dominant open-source Unix-like operating system since 1996.
Back


Back to menu

References

DiBona, C., Ockman, S., & Stone, M. (Eds.). (1999). Open sources: Voices from the open source revolution. Sebastopol, CA: O’Reilly & Associates.

GNU Project. (2001). The free software definition [Online]. Available: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html
Back

Wilcox, J. (2000, April 3). Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson rules that Microsoft violated antitrust laws [Online]. Available: http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-1629387.html
Back


Back to menu

Other Resources

Lessig, L. (1999). Code, and other laws of cyberspace. New York: Basic Books.

Open Source Initiative. (2001). The open source definition [Online]. Available: http://www.opensource.org/osd.html

Raymond, E.S. (1998). The cathedral and the bazaar: Musings on Linux and open source by an accidental revolutionary [Online]. Available: http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/

Rosenberg, D.K. (2000). Open source: The unauthorized white papers. Foster City, CA: Hungry Minds.

Salon.com.(2001). The free software project [Online]. Available: http://www.salon.com/tech/fsp/index.html

Wayner, P. (2000). Free for all: How Linux and the free software movement undercut the hi-tech titans. New York: Harperbusiness.

Young, R., & Goldman, W.R. (1999). Under the radar: How Red Hat changed the software business—and took Microsoft by surprise. Scottsdale, AZ: The Coriolis Group.

Back to menu

Guest Coauthor

Brunelle is a graduate student in Library and Information Science at the University of Illinois (510 E. Daniel St., Champaign, IL 61820, USA). E-mail: brunelle@uiuc.edu

Reader comments on this column are welcome. E-mail: chip@uiuc.edu. Mail: Bertram C. Bruce, Graduate School of Library & Information Science, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 501 East Daniel Street, MC 493, Champaign, IL 61820, USA.


Back to top

For an index of JAAL Technology columns available at this site, click here. To print this column, point and click anywhere on the main text; then use your browser's print command.

Citation: Brunelle, M.D., & Bruce, B.C. (2002, March). Why free software matters for literacy educators. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 45(6). Available: http://www.readingonline.org/electronic/elec_index.asp?HREF=/electronic/jaal/3-02_Column/index.html