Open-source software is an increasingly popular software development and distribution model that may spread further in the face of financial constraints in our current economy. With publicly available source code generally offered without charge, it is tempting to look to open source for potentially significant cost savings in this time of need. But not so fast.

I might be a bit of a rabble-rouser, but since I brought up the example of Linux/open source discrimination in my last post, “You can’t get there from here: Linux platform hurdles” and asked for your feedback, I keep seeing all sorts of complaints of the similarly disgruntled from all over the Internets/series of tubes.

Some time ago we migrated rentalia.com to Linux (Spanish). Based on that experience, I have written a guide to help in Linux migrations. This guide explains the common problems encountered when migrating a SMB to Linux, and the possible solutions you can apply to circumvent those pitfalls.

Do commercial open source companies need better evangelists? There are some good reasons to believe that they do.

"...copyleft is a tool designed to spread freedom in software, at any cost. The FSF, which wrote the GNU and Affero licenses, has the goal to make all software free as in freedom. Companies are ‘free’ to join the revolution, or to look somewhere else for their needs.

It has for long been argued — in several different places in fact — that one of the principal adoption barriers for Free software to face is corruption. The obstacles to clear are not purely technical.

Companies used to give away pens, squishy balls and coffee cups to worm their ways into the hearts of customers. Now, they pass out database software.

More and more open-source developers these days are employees of companies, paid to work on open-source projects, rather than independent programmers doing it for fun. The change raises issues for projects, programmers and employers alike.