Ubuntu Developer Week: The Problem Lifecycle in Ubuntu

I will be giving a session on The Problem Lifecycle in Ubuntu during Ubuntu Developer Week. Thursday February 2nd at 21:30 UTC (16:30 GMT-5 – my time).

The session will cover some of the important aspects of resolving problems in Ubuntu. From getting help on configuration to reporting a bug and seeing it patched. I will also contrast the Ubuntu Lifecycle to that which I experience, as an IT professional, with other proprietary vendors.

There are numerous fantastic sessions through out the week so be sure to check out the complete schedule.

ubuntu-problem diagram

Michael Gartenberg: Apple’s Baghdad Bob

I recently read an opinion piece in Mac World written by Michael Gartenberg; Open versus Closed. There were a few items that made me laugh about how much mis-truth and FUD Apple is trying to spread. Here are a couple of choice quotes from the article with my thoughts after them.

In many ways, iOS devices are probably what the people at Apple had in mind when they created the original Mac. These are appliances that can do magical things without the need for a programmer or computer expert to get involved. The Mac didn’t succeed at that entirely, but today’s iOS devices fulfill that dream.

Say what?

I watched these events as a teenager and I thought Macintosh was about having a computer for everyone. Powerful simple to use computers that would prevent IBM from dominating the personal computer industry and owning the information age. Jobs started out as a computer hobbyist, not a corporate tycoon trying for global domination.

A long time ago, high schools offered shop class. You learned all about cars, how they worked, how they could be repaired. It was necessary information because without it you couldn’t drive.

What? I do not recall any time in history when you could not drive if you did not know how to repair your car. I think Michael might be thinking of one of those Mystery Science Theater 3000 movies.

Open the hood of many of today’s cars and you’ll find vast expanses of plastic, covering parts that are not intended to be user serviceable. Cars have become closed systems.

Really? Certainly they might be more complex, but closed? I can, if I want, replace the factory radio. I can change the spark plugs. It is not closed. No, saying that cars are closed is just down right fiction.

The debate about computers and other tech gadgets — should they be open systems fit for tinkering, or closed that aren’t meant to be cracked open — will no doubt continue for some time come. But I expect it’s a debate that will matter more in the coffee shops of Silicon Valley or in online screeds that few will read and fewer will care about.

The rest of us will be too busy getting work done. We’ll be communicating and collaborating with friends, family and colleagues.

Here is the red herring of his argument.  He implies that those of us who like an open system will get a ‘bad’ system. We will be so busy tinkering that we won’t be able to get work done or communicate with our friends. Wait… I am using an open system. I am using Ubuntu and I am getting work done and communicating with my friends.

Sorry Michael, but just like Baghdad Bob you are practicing mis-information. Could it be because the open system, Android, just knocked off iOS in the smart phone race? Could it be that Apple is afraid of the Android tablets due out in the 4th quarter of this year?

The truth is out there though… people just have to go look.

We can have open, productive, amazing, and magical systems that enable us to do fantastic things with information. All for a lot less than it costs to buy a locked down iToy.

The Journal: State Leaders Weigh In on Open Source Assessment

I opened my email today to find a headline of State Leaders Weigh In on Open Source Assessment; perhaps the time is truly now for getting schools and other governmental entities to consider open source. The article start off with a fairly positive opening.

Open source assessments have great potential for cost savings, collaboration, and standards adoption, but there are also some perception barriers that stand in the way of wider adoption in the immediate future, according to a new report exploring the attitudes of state assessment and technology leaders.

The barriers are detailed in a report entitled “A Report on Education Leaders’ Perceptions of Online Testing in an Open Source Environment,” completed by a marketing firm Grunwald Associates. I have to read the PDF download when I get the chance, but the article summed it up as follows:

Perceived benefits of open source assessment:

• Potential cost savings based on absence of licensing fees;
• Common formatting, data standards, and development standards improve/would improve adaptability and, subsequently, efficiency; and
• Collaboration benefits, including shared resources, ideas, testing standards, and even risks

Concerns about open source assessment:

1. Possible hidden costs, including maintenance, technical support (sometimes a cost when using an open source product), product development necessary to make modifications, and ongoing professional development for educators using original and modified versions;
2. Perception of security risks to both source code and content; and
3. The potential downsides to collaboration, including lack of leadership, lack of alignment in thinking among those recognized as experts for the purposes of development and modifications, and both inherent and unforeseeable inefficiencies.

Additional observations:

1. The greater a state’s current investment in open source technology and its education leaders’ and educators’ awareness of what it offers, the greater the prevailing interest in increasing its use, in advancing its quality, and in becoming better educated about the technology and the content it propagates and has the potential to offer;
2. Education leaders need to be better educated about both the benefits and risks of open source technology and its related issues;
3. Quality, security, ease of use, and access to effective support are of far greater concern than cost savings to users and potential users of the technology;
4. Because effective evaluation of students’ comprehension, progress, and potential requires more complex and in-depth assessment, in order for the education community to embrace the technology for the long term, it must evolve to include more than multiple-choice and short answer options; and
5. Many of the prevailing issues surrounding the use of open source technology for assessment can be addressed with strong leadership, reliable structure, and a well organized approach.

As an advocate for open source the additional observations left me feeling good because I can assist with many of them. I currently present at educational technology conferences about FOSS and how it provides greater value to education than merely lowering costs. This addresses both items 2 and 3. One of the greatest pitfalls I have seen other advocates fall in to is focusing solely on the ‘cost’ portion of FOSS. You can see the slide deck from my latest presentation that talks about 21st Century Skills and FOSS on the New York Team Site. This presentation also included material from the new NETP 2010 recommendations from the US Department of Education that was released on March 5th. I am a strong believer that Canonical or another vendor of a Linux distro could work with the US DoE to meet some of their goals. I am glad to see that more mainstream educational media are picking up the stories about FOSS as it will increase awareness amongst education leaders.

NY State Ubuntu LoCo Global Jam – This Saturday

The NY State Ubuntu LoCo will be hosting an in-person bug jam this Saturday (3/27). The event will take place at the University Christian Fellowship 512 Westcott St,  Syracuse, NY, 13210 from 10am to 6pm. Attendees will learn the following:

• Bugs – finding, triaging and fixing bugs.
• Testing – testing the new release and reporting your feedback.
• Upgrade – upgrading to Lucid from Hardy or Karmic and reporting your upgrade experience.
• Documentation – writing documentation about how to use Ubuntu and how to join the community.
• Translations – translating Ubuntu and helping to make it available in everyone’s local language.
• Packaging – work on Ubuntu packages and improve them.
• Other – other types of contribution such as marketing, packaging, advocacy etc.

If you are an Ubuntu user in New York State please feel free to join us!

(more details)

EdTech Day 2010: Ithaca College

This Thursday (3/25) the New York State Ubuntu LoCo will converge on Ithaca and join the Ithaca Free Software Association at EdTech Day 2010 in Ithaca NY. The description that the organizers give the event is:

Educational Technology Day is a regional technology event that attracts over 1,600 people annually from the upstate New York region. It features local and national vendors such as Apple, Dell, Epson, Hewlett Packard, IBM, Microsoft, SunGard Higher Education, and many others.

While one of the primary audiences for the event is the higher education community, the event is open to all, and there is plenty of information of interest to the K-12 and business communities. You’ll be able to talk directly with major computer and technology vendors, explore educational applications, be dazzled by computer graphics and state of the art audio-visual systems, learn how technology is being used today in and outside of higher education, and see what can be expected in the coming years.

The Ubuntu LoCo team will have members four members from Rochester and two from Syracuse manning a booth on the main sales floor (a few booths over from Microsoft) and I will be giving a presentation on FOSS and 21st Century Skills. The presentation will focus on how working with an open sources project like Ubuntu will provide real world experience for students. Real projects for teachers to guide their students too. Real depth in their applications stack. Last year we gave out over 300 CDs in under two hours. This year we are bringing over 700 CDs to the event and hope this will be enough to make it through the day. I will be updating my blog from the event and after.

The time for FOSS in education is now and I am trying to get that message out.

Announcing: Ubuntu Educators

The Ubuntu Educators team is focused on producing open courseware related to Ubuntu and other FOSS applications. The team is currently using Moodle to both develop and publish courses. The courses will be published as CC-BY-SA and be free to take and available for download as well. The goal is to develop materials that are similar to those in the Open Course Library Project or MIT OpenCourseware Project but focused on helping users learn to use Ubuntu and FOSS applications as well as courses that can assist IT professionals support FOSS in their environment.

The Ubuntu Educators will work under the Ubuntu Learning umbrella with two other teams. One of the other teams is focused on the mechanics of actually teaching the courses in-person or using IRC and the other team is concerned with producing materials for courses. If you would like to know more about the Umbrella group you can visit its wiki page.

If you are interested in joining the team and assisting with course development please visit the teams LaunchPad page, wiki page or the Ubuntu Educators Ning site. The team also has an email list interested folks can join.

classroomtoolkit.net – The Case against Open Source

I recently read an article that made me shake my head. It was full of misinformation, uninformed conclusions, over generalizations, and red herrings. It was about how the argument for Open Source software is being detrimental to our schools. I am going to link to the original and comment on the article here, but I really would like to hear what your thoughts are.

The article starts off with a very insulting over-the-top paragraph:

“The Case against Open Source is really a case against the “Free and Cheap” mantra that some Open Source Advocates chant when they solicit action (and wrong-headed decisions) from school district leaders. This is a case against folks (who know little about instruction and even less about the needs of teachers); who, despite their lack of knowledge, pitch this “save-money fantasy (delusional) strategy” to school district executives (who should know better than to listen, but don’t).”

It becomes obvious from the opening salvo that the author either did not talk to an actual Open Source advocate or did not properly process the message. Open Source advocates are not about Free and Cheap (as in beer); they are about Free as in Liberty. It makes me think that the author is either more interested in a flame war than real discussion or they are of limited intelligence; neither is particularly good.

“These folks could even be school district employees, Techies, who have used Windows™ Open Source software (the most prevalent kind); but, most of these folks are “outsiders” that…”

I love the derisive “Techies” moniker that the author uses here. This term is usually used by the technically inept as a way of devaluing the skills of a technology professional. I recognize that I have no experience in a classroom and value the professional experience of teachers. Regardless of software and hardware choices there must be a synergy between professional IT and professional teaching staff for technology integration to work in schools.

This is followed by a quick sidebar which has several bullet points; I would like to address a few.

“Don’t understand what teacher want or need”

I agree I do not know what a teacher wants or needs. As a technician I view my roll as helping the teacher know what is available and to ‘cut through’ the sales pitch that companies often deliver. I can not tell you the number of times vendors represent their product as web based when it is, in fact, not web based.

“Don’t comprehend the compatibility issues that are associated with running software within a school district ‘technology ecosystem’”

For my part I do have an idea. I know that software and hardware compatibility happen regardless of platform. Even in a closed Apple ecosystem there are compatibility issues that plague school districts.

“Don’t realize that Technology Integration is a failed concept…unless an entire program is funded to an adequate level, with additional funding contingency funding”

I guess the author misses that Free and Open Source (FOSS) software can lower the cost of software which in turn makes it easier for available funding to be adequate. Certainly there still has to be funding for hardware and training.

“Don’t have a clue about how software costs add a minor (almost trivial) expense in the overall success of a technology program”

I think the author truly does not understand how much software costs. I would like to give an example of a typical windows based computer.

• Computer:  ~$500
• Windows Active Directory CAL: $8
• Windows License (Enterprise or Professional): $54
• Microsoft Office: $54
• Photoshop Elements: $54
• Antivirus License: $8
• Altiris Management License: $8
• A package of three ‘educational’ titles: $54

The balance is ~$500 for the hardware and ~$240 for the software for the ‘typical’ windows based instructional computer. There are other solutions that would raise the price for specific departments. This does not include the labor to install and support the systems, but I believe those costs would exist regardless of platform choice and are, thus, a red herring. With the numbers above the software cost 32% of the cost of the computing environment. Perhaps the author considers this amount trivial; I do not.

“Fail to recognize that Apple™ computers provide better solutions to their arguments for “Free and Cheap Open Source” than Open Source software does”

I am not even sure how to respond to this. Apple computers are nothing more than a hardware platform. They are PCs running OS X. The initial purchase of an Apple does come with some software included, but the higher cost of the computer pays for that software. Much of the software must be paid for if you upgrade it in the future.

“A second cost center, training and professional development, should be at least 30% of project cost.”

I would hope that reducing the cost of software would assist in making funding available for training.

“For example: If a project costs $30 million USD, then training and professional development costs should run about $10 million USD. But, school districts seldom allocate more than single-digit percentages to training and professional development…funds for stipends, trainers, follow-up support, release time, software and equipment for teachers to use at home, etc. School districts skimp and under fund in this area, and the results (as observed nation wide) is technology that is un used, under used and under utilized.”

“For example: For the $30 million project, $10 million for hardware, software and infrastructure, $10 million for training and professional development and $10 million for Back-End programming, interoperability, automation, development and support.”

In the scenario the author describes there would be 10 million spent on hardware and software. Given the numbers I gave this would result in a 3.2 million dollar savings. 3.2 million to put towards more training, more hardware or just reduce the total cost of the project.

Computer: $400
Installation: $60
Three Year Warranty: $125
Network Drop (to connect the computer to a Switch): $130
Cost of Port on the Network Switch: $125

Using the authors numbers, which may or may not be valid, the total cost of a computer with proprietary software would be $1080 and a completely open source computer would cost $840. While this reduces the cost of software to 22% of the computing environment; that cost is still far from trivial to me. The author makes no attempt to normalize these costs either. A network drop and switch will have a significantly longer life span than the computer or the software. Those two items might last as long as two or three computers depending on the replacement cycle set for computers. The author proposed a three year replacement cycle which would result in three computers and three software upgrades in the lifespan of the switch and drop. That alters the cost of software to 27% of the cost of the computing environment.

The author also specifically cited the issue of “software and equipment for teachers to use at home” while apparently not grasping that teachers must pay full retail cost for many of the titles schools pay very little for.

• Office $149 w/o a database program or $419 w/ a database program
• Antivirus $39
• Photoshop $129

With open source adoption the teachers cost of applications to replace the core three listed above would be zero.

“Move to full SIF Compliance”

Having worked with several proprietary vendors in regards to SIF compliance I am shocked to see this brought up. Under SIF I have seen product A support a sub-set of data and product B support a different sub-set of data rendering the two products incapable of integration via SIF. Proprietary products and vendors tend to tie your data down in their format.

The article also ignores the fact that the world is moving more and more towards using open source. I agree that one can not just rip and replace all Windows or Apple computers, but it is foolish to not pick and choose quality open source applications for use in the educational arena. It is foolish to ignore the cost of ‘home use’ for both teachers and students if one wants to close the digital divide.

While I agree with the parts of the article that talk about ignored costs of technology integration such as infrastructure and training I can not understand how the author missed the fact that reducing software costs should increase available funding for those two areas. The other wrong-headed idea the author pushed was that the adoption of FOSS is an all or nothing game. It is not.

Link to original article

Adocating for Ubuntu

I have been advocating for Ubuntu for over a year now and in that time I have organized several LoCo events at area tech conferences. In the course of doing this I have learned a few things and this post is a collection of thoughts about how to improve community efforts to advocate for Ubuntu.

Things Canonical Could Improve:

1. Conference Pack: Currently the conference pack is a one-size-fits all item and more variation is needed
   1. Allow a choice of shirts. I can understand having the shirts be something different from what can be bought in the store, but not all conferences are a good fit for T-shirts. I would like to see a choice between a T-Shirt and a Polo. When I give presentations at Education Technology conferences a polo is minimum dress. I bought my own, before the price reduction, so that I would have the proper attire.
   2. Have a choice between ‘gizmos’; allow for the LoCo to choose pens, key fobs, lanyards, etc
   3. Allow for some ‘at-cost’ additions; LoCo groups may be willing to invest some of their own money to get higher quantities, but should not have to pay retail prices
   4. Provide a quantity of official CDs
2. Develop a transparent and well documented process for suggesting events that Canonical should attend or participate in. While the LoCo may be able to support some shows on their own there are others that would be a better fit for Canonical. At the state-wide annual educational technology show I presented at the ‘decision makers’ would have wanted information about purchasing Canonical support if they were considering a move to Ubuntu. In addition having a presence on the vendor floor along with Dell, HP, Toshiba, Microsoft and Apple would ‘validate’ Ubuntu in the minds of some. This presence could be accomplished through ‘partners’, but it should be business oriented not just community.
3. Assist LoCo groups in making ‘partner’ connections. Having the ability to contact a partner resource responsible for community involvement, events and advertising would be beneficial. Making contact through the ‘sales’ channel is possible, but it is not direct.
4. Help the LoCo groups ‘recruit’ partners by making some flyers for partners. The community has a focus on Ubuntu, but in order to attract more companies to use Ubuntu it may be necessary to build a base of partners for businesses to work with. (Some of us could become those companies too!)

I am mostly involved with the Education market because I work in that industry and I would like to put forth some suggestions that are specific to those potential customers.

1. Create a program to recognize teachers and schools that are exemplary examples of Ubuntu and FOSS adoption.
   1. Have a distinguished educator program that recognizes employees of educational institutions for their efforts.
      1. Present the awards or announce the awards through groups like ISTE and at events like NECC
      2. Create a support program for these educators that assist them with expanding their integration of Ubuntu and FOSS
      3. Create a channel for these educators to give Canonical and the Ubuntu community feedback about what is and is not working in the classroom
      4. Offer to fund or partially fund these distinguished members attendance at key educational technology events in their area in exchange for their advocating (presenting) at the conference
   2. Provide a program for recognizing schools that have successfully migrated to Ubuntu
      1. Present awards or announce the awards through groups like ISTE and at events like NECC
      2. Provide a small grant, perhaps through partnerships with hardware vendors, for technology purchases (more servers, desktops or laptops running Ubuntu)

I think there is a significant opportunity for FOSS and Ubuntu, in particular, to make headway in the Education market. With US educators currently being very focused on ISTE 21st century skills there is an openness to change that represents an open window. The items I outlined above are rough, but the present some real ideas on how to increase awareness and adoption of FOSS and Ubuntu. There is a real chance to improve the learning environment.

F/OSS at NYSCATE

I wanted to get this post done sooner, but the demands of the holiday caused a delay.

First I want to familiarize readers with what NYSCATE is:

—-
NYSCATE is an organization of dedicated technology using educators, committed to transforming teaching and learning, in order to provide our children with an education that prepares them to live satisfying and productive lives. [more]
—-

A Little History:
I worked for several months as a Fedora Ambassador, Ubuntu Member and Ubuntu LoCo leader to try to get a booth at this event and submitted a presentation proposal. My presentation proposal was accepted, but I was unable to secure the funding necessary to purchase a booth. While it was frustrating not to be able to advocate for F/OSS on the vendor floor it was rewarding to see several other F/OSS presentations make the ‘grade’ and be approved.

The Presentation:
My presentation, Educational Technology and Equity in Today’s Schools, was well attended, for a closing day presentation, and was also well received by the audience. Most of the audience was unfamiliar with F/OSS and were impressed with the quality and depth of the software choices an educator has when using F/OSS.

Fedora and OLPC:
Through the hard work and effort of an RIT professor and a fellow Fedora Ambassador, Karlie Robinson of On-Disk.com, there was a F/OSS presence on the vendor floor. Karlie reported that the booth was a success, but she still saw the opportunity to make more of an impact. [more]

The Future:
I think that there is an opportunity to educate teachers and educational leaders about the possibilities F/OSS holds for their communities. I plan on doing the following in the upcoming year:

• EdTech Day 2010 (Ithaca College)
  • Get a booth and man it with fellow F/OSS advocates from both the Ubuntu LoCo and Fedora Ambassadors
  • Submit at least one presentation proposal (would like to have other F/OSS advocates propose enough to have a F/OSS track)
• NYSCATE 2010
  • Work with Fedora (RedHat), Ubuntu (Canonical) and some Linux hardware vendors to try and finance a booth on the vendor floor
  • Submit a proposal for a 4 or 8 hour F/OSS immersion experience
  • Submit at least two proposals for presentations pertaining to F/OSS in education

I truly think that exposing the education ‘market’ to F/OSS can have a far reaching impact. It can reduce the cost of educational software to tax payers while closing the gap in the ‘digital divide’.

NYSCATE social media

NYSCATE is using the following tags for social media:

#nyscate

#nyscate2009

They are also using wikispaces for presenters to add information for their presentations. You can check my wikispaces presentation page out and give me feedback.