VisionMobile has produced a nice primer for people unaware of the larger issues of openness. There is much more to it besides the license. Part of it is the lineage and current practices. It is a must read if you use or plan using free software for business. When you have to know exactly where you stand. The link is a PDF file.

News flash to old-school software vendors: an "API" doesn't make your product "open" and it certainly doesn't make it "open source." For the second time in two days, I've seen product marketing claiming a product was open because the vendor supplies an application program interface. Phooey.

The fat cats from Redmond take taxpayers' money, pay almost no tax, and also use their political power to make the system more discriminatory

The connotation and meaning of the word "open" continue to degrade

Being against net neutrality is one of those arguments that on first glance seems reasonable. The power company, after all, charges us more as we consume more electricity--why shouldn't Internet carriers be allowed to charge based on data load and regulate traffic accordingly?

Any old standards hand forced to choose the single most disputed issue in standard setting over the past decade would likely respond with a deceivingly simple question: "What does it mean to be an 'open standard?'" A similar debate rages in the open source community between those that believe that some licenses (e.g., the BSD, MIT and Apache licenses) are "open enough," while others would respond

A quick look at ways in which Microsoft markets its closed ecosystem under misleading banners. THERE are all sorts of articles out there that can truly bother one's mind. For starters, Microsoft's latest spin on "Open" XML is being deconstructed by Andre...

A quick walk through people's opinions on Microsoft and 'openness'