Getting Java plugin to Mozilla/Firefox on Debian

I needed to get the Java plugin to work with Mozilla Firefox on yet another Debian workstation. Here’s the (currently updated) instructions:

  1. Get the latest Java Linux self-extracting file (not the RPM)
  2. Become root: sudo -i
  3. Make a folder for the Java environment: mkdir /usr/local/java.sun; cd /usr/local/java.sun (or wherever you want)
  4. Extract the package: sh /path/to/downloaded/jre-whatever.bin – it will extract everything into a subdirectory in the current directory
  5. Make a symlink to ease things: ln -s jre-whatever java.current
  6. Change permissions: chmod -Rc go+rX .
  7. Make symlink to Mozilla’s plugins folder:
    • Personal install (only for your user account): Leave root and make the symlink into your personal mozilla preferences: ln -s /usr/local/java.sun/java.current/plugin/i386/ns7/libjavaplugin_oji.so ~/.mozilla/plugins/
    • Global install (for all users): Continue as root and make the symlink into /usr/lib/mozilla-firefox/plugins, but be prepared to take care of that plugin after every Mozilla or Firefox update.

On evolution of life and IT businesses

Every now and then these strange connections between seemingly unrelated topics happen. This time it happened yesterday when I was at a Mobile seminar organized by Hetky, and one of the presenters mentioned that even though the IT bubble burst and left thousands of bankrupt companies in its wake, there were still some good companies that survived. And of course it’s not a surprise that the good companies survived. But the connection to the evolution of life happened because I had just finished reading The Science of Discworld by Terry Pratchett, Ian Stewart, and Jack Cohen. And here’s the connection:

The planet Earth is irregularly but repeatedly being hit by events that very nearly wipe out all life. But not quite. There’s bacteria in the bottoms of the oceans, and even 10 miles deep into the crust you find bacteria living on just rock silicates. The typical event is a large lump of rock that just hits our planet (doesn’t really matter where), causing a massive mega-tsunami that goes around the planet a few times, but – more importantly – the tremors it causes (that of course would destroy any buildings if there have been any at those times) converge on the other side of the planet, breaking the crust in an area about the size of India, causing massive vulcanic activity that will most likely burn the atmosphere, then cover everything in acid and dust, and finally cool the planet so that pretty much everything is covered with a mile or two of ice. Not many higher life forms survive a pummelling like that.

An event such as described above probably accounts for the changes in geological epocs. And, of course, only the fittest survice. Those that are able to adapt themselves to the rapidly changing environment. But the most important implication is that evolution itself would not happen if there were no catastrophies. The dinosaurs ruled for a hundred million years, and pretty much nothing happened in the way of evolution. Since dinosaurs worked, they stayed the same. Boring. But throw a spanner the size of Texas into the works, and things get interesting.

So while the bursting of the IT bubble caused a lot of people to lose a lot of money (or, more correctly: got some people rich with other peoples’ money), it also performed a necessary operation – a change of environment. And, to be more accurate, the bursting of the bubble was not the cause, but the result of people realizing that the much-hyped IT businesses weren’t as great as they tried to make you believe. And most of the companies got wiped out, and rightly so. The ones that survived were able to function in an environment without inflated expectations.

Another way of looking at this is that after any major change in the environment, there is always a new niche, which is pretty soon filled by a rich variety of creatures. After the dinosaurs became chalk, the small mammals started to stake their claim in the suddenly-free environment. And this variety of creatures probably expanded until the space was taken up, and then competition ensued again. And the winners are the species that are still going strong.

Likewise, when the IT business got going, it created a new, free niche, that needed to be filled. Many, many people and companies converged on this free space, and most were successful, since there was no competition – there was enough investor money for everyone. But when that excess money ran out, competition ensued. And the weak were pulverized.

As a post scriptum I have to mention another environment that will need adaptation in the foreseeable future – stock markets. Because public stock markets don’t really produce money, but rather just transfer it around (if someone earns money through investments, it’s always someone else’s money), they are basically a huge pyramid scheme – getting new people to join with their money, so the guys at the top of the pyramid (the top professional investors) can cash it for themselves. And this whole pyramid will come tumbling down in either of two cases: 1) people stop joining (as in the great depression in the USA in the 1920′s) because the don’t believe in the system anymore, or 2) there’s no more people left to join. So at the latest when everyone is on board, the system will simply break, because without newbie money flowing in, there’s nothing to be gained. Are you prepared for a no-growth economy? Or as everyone gets their money out as quickly as possible and the bubble bursts, and all the effects thereof?

Or are you ready for the next natural catastrophy, which most likely is the melting of the ice caps, melting of the methane crystal deposits in the bottoms of the sea, melting of the permanently frozen methane deposits in the tundras, and probably many other yet undiscovered mechanisms, which will feed each other and warm this planet significantly, raise the sea level by 10 meters, and change the ecological conditions everywhere. And in addition the ice caps will probably produce a few mega-tsunamis as they melt in continent-sized pieces sliding into the sea, destroying all coastal civilization. As most major cities are coastal, a tsunami + 10 meters of water means a lot of homeless people. As most nuclear power plants are coastal, it will also mean hundreds of deposits of hot radioactive fuel, without working coolant systems. This could happen – oh, tomorrow, for example. Are you ready for that? I’m not. This last vision of the future is pretty much what Risto Isomäki describes in his newest book, Sarasvatin Hiekkaa (see review) (only in Finnish, sorry).

Making money with open source

I had a conversation with a new media student, and was surprised to hear that the curriculum of the Medialab of the University of Art and Design of Helsinki does not include anything about business and open source.

So here’s the 101 of open source business models:

Provide something that has a demand: This applies to business in general, in all fields. Do something that has enough value for others, and make them aware of what you’re offering.

Bits are free: Charging for digital data doesn’t work, since most people consider bits to be free (as in beer). This means that you can’t make your business model about selling software packages, or selling digital content (like music, images, or whatever). Many companies of course try, and do so with mixed success. It is, however, a battle they’re losing, since more and more software and content is becoming free (as in beer and as in speech), so as customers find their needs satisfied with freer alternatives, they stop coming to you. Of course, it’s a very lucrative thought to just develop software once and then keep on selling it – free money, you may think. And yes, it is. This is what Microsoft is doing with its software. But now that the free alternatives are becoming good enough (a disruptive innovation), Microsoft’s business model is in trouble.

Nobody owns the software: Since the software is open source, no-one owns it. Well, of course someone has copyright on it (or parts of it), but being free/libre open source software, you (or anyone) has the right to make any changes to it (with the possible exception of the license and list of authors) and publish and distribute the changed version. This has some wide-ranging consequences, which give new possibilities for businesses.

Marketing by word-of-mouth: In addition or instead of traditional marketing ways, providers of valuable contributions around an open source product gain fame. This is why Linus Torvalds gets paid (quite well, I imagine) just for hacking the Linux kernel, even though much of what Linus does doesn’t directly benefit Linus’s employer. This is why open source gurus don’t need other jobs in addition to hacking the code and travelling around the world in conferences (and, again, getting paid quite nicely). The catch here is that they have shown that they know what they’re doing – by providing open and free stuff, that anyone can see. If they provided closed, commercial stuff, no-one would bother paying just to see whether the content is any good. But free content gets you a huge audience, and if you do a good job, everyone will see it. And suddenly the door is open to all those “expert” possibilities, like conference keynote speaking and consulting.

Services are always needed: While software may be free, people still need services around them. The traditional services are things like installation services, tech support, and maintenance. But open source (since you also have the source, and the license to change it) provides other possibilities as well:

  • Localization: Some customer may be ready to pay for you to provide a translation of the software’s user interface and/or the manual into their language. Of course, after the localization is complete, it will be available for anyone else for free. But whoever wants it the most needs to do it themselves, or pay for someone else to do it. That someone else could be you.
  • Documentation: Most open source projects don’t have very good documentation, but the customers need good documentation. Someone could make a business out of providing it. Of course, you don’t need to license your manual (if you’ve done it from scratch) as open, so you get to charge everyone who wants to use it. Or you could operate in the spirit of open content and license it under a Creative Commons license, meaning you get paid only once. There are other, fairer ways, of getting extra revenue for a good manual: you can print it as a book and sell that – it’s surprising how many people actually want a printed book in addition to a free online version. But maybe the best reason of putting all “finished bits” available for free is this: as a known producer of high quality content (software patches, documentation, whatever), you gain fame. And fame gets you places.
  • Training: Even printed manuals aren’t enough – most companies want training for their staff in using a new system. You need some fame to be considered a valid trainer (read: provide quality content that build up your fame as an expert on the system in question). Training is a good business, since even if the training material is freely available, the trainer is always needed.
  • Software development / consulting: If the customer need to integrate their new open system with other systems, or make major customizations to it, they need a consultant to their development team, or an entire software development team, to do the required modifications. This works brings very good revenue, but you need lots of fame to be considered a worthy partner.

Summary: It’s about the services, not the bits. Provide services around the software that the customers need. Take advantage of the freedoms that open source grants you: you’re not limited to just providing services around the software, but you can modify, localise, customize, and improve the software to fit your customers’ needs. Build up fame by putting everything you do openly available, and do only high-quality stuff. Leverage that fame as a free marketing tool to get even more opportunities to use your expertise in your business.

Finally, a nice example: www.openoffice.fi. It’s a Finnish company that was built around providing services around OpenOffice.org (OpenOffice in Finnish). They have a good domain so customers can find them. They provide manuals, FAQs, and a help desk. All manuals, templates, patches, and instructions that they’ve produced are openly available for anyone (which gives the company a lot of good karma in the eyes of all Finnish people who want to use OpenOffice in their homes), but commercial support with e-mail and phone help desks is also available, and that’s what’s producing the revenue. Many people are familiar with the company’s templates and manuals, including CEOs (and families of CEOs) of companies that are considering switching MS Office to OpenOffice.org. So when the switch becomes imminent, there’s a high probability that the company will at least consider OpenOffice.fi as a partner. Fame gives you business opportunities.

OpenOffice.org 2 is the cheap, legal, and open alternative to MS Office

I’ve been using OpenOffice.org 2 for a few months now, and before that, Openoffice.org 1.x for years. Before that, I’ve used MS Office, StarOffice, IBM Works, WordPerfect, etc. At why.openoffice.org there are references to studies that show that upgrading from MS Office to OpenOffice.org 2 costs like 10% of the upgrade to the newest MS Office – licensing fees and user training included.

Another good reason to switch to OpenOffice.org is that Microsoft is getting more evil – acquiring software spying companies, adding tracking code into Office, etc. Of course, if you pay the licenses, and understand the licenses, and can be sure that all your company techs understand the licenses and don’t violate them by doing an illegal installation somewhere, you’re fine (although a lot poorer). But why bother? Just switching to OpenOffice.org gets you off the hook – no more licensing worries, employees can borrow the installation CDs (or even make copies of them), and you can all focus on something more important than controlling Office use.

But maybe the most important reason in my opinion is the lack of standard on the part of MS Office. The approved standard format for word processing, spreadsheets and presentations is OpenDocument. Of course I understand the reason why Microsoft refured to support OpenDocument (the reason being, of course, that when you are a monopoly, it’s cost-effective to spend all your funds (minus $1) to protecting that monopoly, and this is what Microsoft is doing – keeping its software closed, locked and non-compliant, and hiring every patent lawyer to graduate from Stanford (according to Lawrence Lessig at OSBC 2005)). Currently I just feel embarrased for all the people who send me Word documents, and profusely claiming that they’ve been checked by a virus scanner. Good for them, but why, oh why, must I put up with that stupid proprietary format still? Of course, Openoffice.org opens MS Office files without a hassle, but still.