Firefox as Commons

Interesting post here from Mozilla's Mitchell Baker, which shows that she's beginning to regard Firefox as a commons:

Firefox generates an emotional response that is hard to imagine until you experience it. People trust Firefox. They love it. Many feel -- and rightly so -- that Firefox is part "theirs." That they are involved in creating Firefox and the Firefox phenomena, and in creating a better Internet. People who don't know that Firefox is open source love the results of open source -- the multiple languages, the extensions, the many ways people use the openness to enhance Firefox. People who don't know that Firefox is a public asset feel the results through the excitement of those who do know.

Firefox is created by a public process as a public asset. Participants are correct to feel that Firefox belongs to them.

Absolutely spot-on. But I had to smile at the following:

To start with, we want to create a part of online life that is explicitly NOT about someone getting rich. We want to promote all the other things in life that matter -- personal, social, educational and civic enrichment for massive numbers of people. Individual ability to participate and to control our own lives whether or not someone else gets rich through what we do. We all need a voice for this part of the Internet experience. The people involved with Mozilla are choosing to be this voice rather than to try to get rich.

I know that this may sound naive. But neither I nor the Mozilla project is that naive, and we are not stupid. We recognize that many of us are setting aside chances to make as much money as possible. We are choosing to do this because we want the Internet to be robust and useful even for activities that aren't making us rich.

Only in America do you need to explain why you prefer to make the world a better place rather than making yourself rich....

Firefox Hit 400 Million Downloads

This is worth quoting at length:

On November 9th, 2004, you all started a movement. Spread Firefox, supported by tens of thousands of contributors, took just 99 days to deliver 25 million downloads of Firefox to a world of people desperate for a better Web -- a Web that didn't overwhelm them with pop-ups, a Web that didn't infect their systems with viruses and spyware, a Web that was fun again, simply put, a Web that worked.

In less than six months, you all doubled that number to 50 million downloads, turned open source into a household word and reasserted the supremacy of choice and simplicity.

It took the Spread Firefox global community of activists only one year to reach the 100 million downloads mark and to let the world know that innovation was alive again on the Web.

And just one year ago you all helped to double that number again, to 200 million downloads. More than 50,000 of you, with Spread Firefox buttons and banners, not only helped Firefox achieve an amazing download milestone, but you all helped to make Firefox one of the world's most recognized and respected brands.

Today, you all have done it once again. With your amazing efforts, Firefox has reached 400 million downloads and demonstrated that not even the world's most powerful companies can keep people from a better, safer, and faster Web experience. You all, the grass roots and the heart of the Firefox movement, have helped hundreds of millions of people find that better, safer, and faster Web.

Even though these are downloads, not installed versions, it's still important to note that the rate at which people are trying out or upgrading Firefox is accelerating: 100 million in one year, 200 million in two years, but 400 million in three years. It will be interesting - and indicative - to see what happens in a year's time.

Mozilla's Middle Kingdom Mess

Mozilla is a disaster in China:

With more than 160 million Internet users, China is the world's second-largest Net market and is likely to overtake the U.S. as No. 1 by the end of the decade. More than four-fifths of China's Internet users use IE to go online, mostly because it's bundled with the Windows operating system. Homegrown companies Maxthon—a private company based in Hong Kong—and Tencent —the Shenzhen-based operator of China's most popular instant messaging service—both have browsers based on IE kernels that are the second and third most commonly used in China.

Mozilla estimates there are 3.5 million regular Firefox users in China, giving it just 2% of the market. (According to June, 2007, figures by Onestat, Mozilla has a 19.65% market share in the U.S.) Mozilla has set a goal of grabbing a 5% market share in China "as quickly as possible," says Gong.

The problem?

In the West, Mozilla has been able to eat away at IE's market share by promoting Firefox as a free open-source software project. In China, the open-source movement is having a harder time gaining traction because of widespread software piracy. With pirated copies of Windows XP or Vista selling on the street for less than $2, there is little economic incentive for Chinese Internet users to download Firefox.

The solution?

Bill Xu, founder of the ZEUUX Free Software Community, a Beijing group that promotes open source, points out that for Firefox to succeed in China, it shouldn't compete on cost but by stressing its security features. "IE isn't very secure. It's plagued with a lot of add-ons, malware, and viruses. Firefox is more secure, and that's the main reason a lot of users choose it," he says.

Well, I think this may require some more creative thinking. It's not just a matter of saying "security", not least because Firefox has its own security problems, and it will be easy to defeat that tactic. Perhaps we need more Firefox plugins that serve the Chinese market, specific to the Chinese language, for example.

In any case, this is getting serious: failure to make inroads into the Chinese browser market undoes much of the good work in Europe, where Firefox is getting close to a majority share in some markets.

Spreading Spread Firefox

Most computer users by now have heard of the Firefox browser. This is hardly surprising given the extraordinary rate at which it is still being downloaded and diffused around the world well over a year since its formal launch.

Given that there have now been nearly 150 million downloads (converting that into a meaningful number of users is probably impossible), it is only natural that people think of Firefox as an incredibly successful free browser. It is that, certainly, but it is also much more.

After all, the open source community has shown time and again it can write great code: Linux, Apache, The GIMP, OpenOffice.org - choose your own favourite. But Firefox has done something else - something that has never been done before by a free software project.

It has translated the secret of open source's power - a huge, distributed and connected development team - into the sphere of marketing. The Spread Firefox site has mobilised tens of thousands of users - not as beta testers, as has been the custom previously, but as a guerrilla marketing force.

Most famously, that force was mobilised to pay for the double-page ad in The New York Times. Through the aggregation of many relatively small donations it was able to take out some high-price advertising. In other words, the approach scales.

But the real achievement of Spread Firefox is much subtler, and more diffuse. The tens - hundreds? - of thousands of active Firefox supporters are Microsoft's worst nightmare: a completely invisible - because distributed - team of product evangelists that it can never hope to pin down, let alone match.

This is such an important step beyond the traditional open source process that it is tragic not more has been done with it. For example, although there is a Spread OpenOffice.org, it is only now that a Spread KDE site has been created; both seem in their early stages. But where are all the others? Where are Spread Linux, Spread Thunderbird, Spread GIMP, Spread Audacity and the rest?

All these programs have enthusiastic users who could be directly mobilised across the Internet to spread the word about how good these applications are. Relying on old-fashioned, uncoordinated word-of-mouth is simply to throw away everything that has been learned from Spread Firefox - and to discard one of the strongest trumps in the free software hand.

What Henry Blodget Just Does Not Get

Here's one of the barmiest - and saddest - things I've ever read, from a certain Henry Blodget:

When Will Firefox/Mozilla Go Public?

Mozilla's earnest Mitchell Baker and friends will, of course, publicly say "NEVER!" But let's be serious. Why wouldn't the Mozilla Foundation, which presumably exists to do good for the world, want to be the proud possessor of several billion dollars worth of public company stock? The Google Foundation, also a good-doing 501c3, certainly hasn't done badly with its own stash of GOOG. And, over time, like any smart foundation, Mozilla and Google will likely want diversify their holdings so they can continue to do good for decades.

Also, as well as Firefox is doing as a part-time love project, it could do even better with some major marketing, deal-making, and distribution power behind it. Every company in the world (save Microsoft) should want a Microsoft (and Google) competitor to succeed. So every company should want to at least consider a partnership with Firefox.

Mozilla Corporation was set up with one aim in mind: to further the open source code produced by the Mozilla Foundation, and the ecosystem around it. It was not set up to make money, or to have money as is its raison d'être. If it went public, money, not the users of its code, would dominate its decisions - and would have to, or shareholders would sue the management. (Google Foundation is a private foundation, and hence doesn't worry about shareholders: Google does, but it isn't trying to promote open source, it's trying to make money.)

Mozilla depends, not incidentally but critically, on those users: its programmers could write the code, but they couldn't debug it on their own, as open source history has often shown. And the amazing SpreadFirefox marketing effort made up of hundreds of thousands of enthusiasts giving their time and even money to further Firefox would evaporate the instant they realised that they were doing it to make other people rich. The moment Mozilla goes for the money, it cuts itself off at the the legs.

And even if in some moment of suicidal insanity all this did happen, the code would be forked faster than you can say "GNU": all the best - because most passionate - coders, beta-testers and marketing people would leave. This would split Firefox's marketshare and destroy any power that it currently has - and with it most of its revenue.

Mozilla Inc would promptly implode, and the "new" Firefox would steadily rise from the ashes, just as the old did from the original Mozilla. We could even call it "Phoenix"....

Update: From the horse's mouth.

Firefox (In)Security Update Dynamics Exposed

One of the great things about Firefox is its automatic update scheme. Here's some interesting research on the subject:

Although there is an increasing trend for attacks against popular Web browsers, only little is known about the actual patch level of daily used Web browsers on a global scale. We conjecture that users in large part do not actually patch their Web browsers based on recommendations, perceived threats, or any security warnings. Based on HTTP useragent header information stored in anonymized logs from Google's web servers, we measured the patch dynamics of about 75% of the world's Internet users for over a year. Our focus was on the Web browsers Firefox and Opera. We found that the patch level achieved is mainly determined by the ergonomics and default settings of built-in auto-update mechanisms. Firefox' auto-update is very effective: most users installed a new version within three days. However, the maximum share of the latest, most secure version never exceeded 80% for Firefox users and 46% for Opera users at any day in 2007. This makes about 50 million Firefox users with outdated browsers an easy target for attacks. Our study is the result of the first global scale measurement of the patch dynamics of a popular browser.

What's interesting, too, is that this was research done using data drawn from Google: there must be a lot of really useful info there to be mined - suitably anonymised, of course. (Via Bruce Schneier.)

Misinformed about Malware

I was moaning recently about the appalling sloppiness when it comes to viruses et al.: they are practically all for Windows, and yet nobody mentions this fact. Here are two more egregious examples.

First:

Researchers at BitDefender have discovered a new type of malicious software that collects passwords for banking sites but targets only Firefox users.

The malware, which BitDefender dubbed "Trojan.PWS.ChromeInject.A" sits in Firefox's add-ons folder, said Viorel Canja, the head of BitDefender's lab. The malware runs when Firefox is started.

The malware uses JavaScript to identify more than 100 financial and money transfer Web sites, including Barclays, Wachovia, Bank of America, and PayPal along with two dozen or so Italian and Spanish banks. When it recognizes a Web site, it will collect logins and passwords, forwarding that information to a server in Russia.

Firefox has been continually gaining market share against main competitor Internet Explorer since its debut four years ago, which may be one reason why malware authors are looking for new avenues to infect computers, Canja said.

Bad, wicked Firefox, bad wicked open source...except that this trojan *only* works on Windows...which means it's bad wicked Windows, yet again. But the article never mentions this, of course.

Or take this:

BATTLEFIELD bandwidth is low at best, making networks sticky and e-mails tricky. American soldiers often rely on memory sticks to cart vital data between computers. Off-duty, they use the same devices to move around music and photos. The dangers of that have just become apparent with the news that the Pentagon has banned the use of all portable memory devices because of the spread of a bit of malicious software called agent.btz.

...


The most remarkable feature of the episode may not be the breach of security, but the cost of dealing with it. In the civilian world, at least one bank has dealt with agent.btz by blocking all its computers’ USB ports with glue. Every bit of portable memory in the sprawling American military establishment now needs to be scrubbed clean before it can be used again. In the meantime, soldiers will find it hard or outright impossible to share, say, vital digital maps, let alone synch their iPods or exchange pictures with their families.

And yes, you guessed it, it only works on Windows. So that bit about "[t]he most remarkable feature of the episode may not be the breach of security, but the cost of dealing with it" is really about the cost of using Windows - well, it's The Economist, what do you expect, accuracy? When will they ever learn?

Firefox Hits a Fourth

That is, Firefox now has nearly 25% of the European browser market according to XiTiMonitor. The figures for the rest of the world are not quite so impressive, but it seems clear that Europe is leading the way here. And as it does so, the global importance of serving Firefox users will rise, and so will the tendency to use it elsewhere.

XitiMonitor also has some other interesting graphs showing the rate of uptake of Firefox 2.0 and Internet Explorer 7. From this, it seems clear that Firefox users are upgrading faster than Internet Explorer users, as you might expect since the former are probably more tech-savvy than the latter. (Via Quoi9.)

It Ain't Over Until Blake Ross Sings

There are three names that most people would associate with Firefox. Ben Goodger, who works for Google, and whose blog is pretty quiet these days. Asa Dotzler, who has a articulate and bulging blog. And then there's Blake Ross, also with a lively blog, but probably better known for being the cover-boy of Wired when it featured Firefox.

Given his background - and the immense knock-on effect his Firefox work has had - Ross is always worth listening to. That's particularly the case for this long interview, because it's conducted for the Opera Watch blog, which lends it both a technological depth and a subtle undercurrent of friendly competition:

I think Opera is better geared toward advanced users out of the box, whereas Firefox is tailored to mainstream users by default and relies on its extension model to cater to an advanced audience. However, I see both browsers naturally drifting toward the middle. Firefox is growing more advanced as the mainstream becomes Web-savvier, and I see Opera scaling back its interface, since it started from the other end of the spectrum.

(Via LXer.)

Firefox: the Breakthrough

This is it. Just look at these dynamics:

The number of businesses allowing employees to download the Firefox Web browser soared this year, and at least one analyst believes the recently released Internet Explorer 7 could boost use of Firefox in companies.

Fully, 44 percent of businesses with 250 employees or more allow workers to download Mozilla Corp.'s open-source browser at the office, according to a survey conducted this year by JupiterResearch. Last year, only 26 percent of such businesses were willing to do the same.

So, we're through the crucial stage, where Firefox is only downloaded by enthusiasts, to that of corporate acceptance. That's good, but even better is the timing:

For many businesses, the move to Vista could take a year and a half or more, analysts say.

As a result, many people who get IE 7 at home through Microsoft's automatic update service will likely find IE6 lacking. Without the option of installing IE 7 at work, they are likely to turn to Firefox, Wilcox said.

Yee-ha, as they say.

Mozilla Starts to Follow a New Drumbeat

I've written often enough about Firefox and its continuing steady gains of browser market share. Here's another nice stat:

Roughly keeping pace with previous years, Firefox grew 40% worldwide. Two regions in particular continued adopting Firefox at a breakneck pace — South America (64%) and Asia (73%).

Most of the 40% growth occurred recently. In the 4 months leading up to the holiday season, Firefox added 22.8 million active daily users. During that same period last year, Firefox added 16.4 million users.

That's all well and good, but it raises the question: what should Mozilla be doing *after* it conquers the browser world – that is, once it has 50% market share?

On Open Enterprise blog.

Microsoft's Gift to Firefox

Firefox has been incredibly lucky. It has taken Microsoft an extraordinary amount of time to face up to the challenge this free browser represents, during which Firefox has notched up a serious market share that won't be going away any time soon.

However, my great fear was that once Internet Explorer 7 came out, the appeal of Firefox to people who wanted a stable, standards-based browser would diminish considerably. After all, good enough is generally good enough, and surely, I thought, Microsoft will get this one right, and produce what's necessary?

If this report is anything to go by, it seems not.

Incredibly, Microsoft will not be supporting fully the Cascading Style Sheet 2 (CSS 2) standard. As the story explains:

The most critical point in Wilson's post, in my mind, is Microsoft's admission that it will fail the crucial Acid2 browser-compliance test , which the Web Standards Project (WaSP) designed to help browser vendors ensure that their products properly support Web standards. Microsoft apparently disagrees. "Acid2 ... is pointedly not a compliance check," Wilson noted, contradicting the description on the Acid2 Web site. "As a wish list, [Acid2] is really important and useful to my team, but it isn't even intended, in my understanding, as our priority list for IE 7.0." Meanwhile, other browser teams have made significant efforts to comply with Acid2.

If you look at the CSS 2 standard, you'll note that it became a recommendation over eight years ago. And yet Microsoft is still not close to implementing it fully, unlike other browsers. Even if you argue that CSS 2 is only of interest to advanced coders, or at best a standard for the future, it is nonetheless a key test of a browser development team's attitudes and priorities.

This is a tremendous opportunity for Firefox: provided it continues to support standards better than Microsoft - and this now looks likely - it will occupy the high ground with all that this implies in terms of continuing to attract users and designers. Thanks, Microsoft.

More Microsoftie FUD

Another comparative "analysis" of security flaws in Windows and Red Hat. The result: Windows is better - the figures prove it. Well, yes, but let's look at those figures at little more. The giveaway is this paragraph:

Because of the nature of the Open Source model, there seems to be a higher tendency (unscientificly speaking) to just copy a piece of code and reuse it in another components. This means that if a piece of code turns out to be flawed, not only must it be fixed, but also that maintainers must find every place they might've reused that blob of code. A visual inspection showed me that many of these were the multiple vulnerabilities affecting firefox, mozilla and thunderbird. In a typical example, firefox packages were fixed, then mozilla packages were fixed 4 days later, then thunderbird was fixed 4 days after that.

Note that it says "In a typical example, firefox packages were fixed, then mozilla packages were fixed 4 days later". So one reason why Red Hat has more vulnerabilities is that it has far more packages included, many of which duplicate functions - like Firefox and Mozilla. The point is, you wouldn't install both Firefox and Mozilla: you'd choose one. So there's only one vulnerability that should be counted. Not only that, but Red Hat is penalised because it actually offers much more than Windows.

I don't know what the other vulnerabilities were, but I'd guess they involved similar over-counting - either through duplication, or simply because Red Hat offered extra packages. By all means compare Windows and Red Hat, but make it a fair comparison.

The (Firefox) Fur Begins to Fly

As Firefox teeters on the brink of the first 2.0 beta, things are starting to get serious. No longer are we talking about a flash in the pan: Firefox is now a real, established rival to Internet Explorer, as these numbers from OneStat.com indicate.

Of course, there's a lot of variation in the degree to which Firefox has been adopted, from highs like Germany, with a stunning 39% using Firefox against 56% sticking with IE, to the snivelling Brits, of whom barely 11.5% use the Fox, while 86% cling to Uncle Bill.

The arrival of IE 7 will have an impact, but there's no doubt that Microsoft has left it far too late to roll back these kind of gains (even in the UK).

Firefox 2.0

I commented earlier on how Firefox's market share seems to be soaring; clearly the organisation is beginning to gain some serious momentum in the market. However, Internet Explorer 7.0 is slouching towards Redmond to be born, and will finally offer features that have been available from Firefox and Opera for some time. Potentially this could stunt further growth for the open source browser, and even pull back some of its market share.

The news that Firefox 2.0 is well on its way shows that the Mozilla organisation and Firefox coders are well aware of the threat. Releasing 2.0 so soon will keep the pressure up on Microsoft, and those share figures rising, one hopes.

Firefox Fights On

Everybody knows that Firefox is one of open source's biggest success stories. What many may not know is that the story is not over:

OneStat.com (www.onestat.com), the number one provider of real-time web analytics, today reported that the global usage share of Mozilla's browsers is 12.72 percent. The global usage share increased 1.03 percent since January 2007. Mozilla Firefox 2.0 has a global usage share of 11.48 percent.

This is really significant, because it suggests that Firefox's rise is not simply a question of hardcore free software supporters switching, but rather a sustained move by some general users too. The question is, how long will it go on? (Via Tuxmachines.org.)

The World Wins South Korea for Firefox

I've written before about the curious case of South Korea, where the use of Internet Explorer and ActiveX is almost mandatory. I rather despaired of anything changing this situation, since there didn't seem to be any way to get around it from outside. And yet, remarkably, change is coming:

Korea's multifaceted e-government services will be made available for those logging on from FireFox or Safari, web browsers that are gaining more popularity worldwide as an alternative to Internet Explorer.

According to the government Sunday, users of these "non-traditional" browsers will be able to file for year-end tax returns, sign up for a new passport or look for job openings and do much more at various service Web sites operated by the state.

The Ministry of Public Administration and Security, which is in charge of directing e-government initiatives, said that it will invest 11.5 billion won this year for technical projects to increase the browser compatibility of 49 e-government service Web sites.

Starting 2011, all of the 150 e-government Web sites are expected to be accessible from any browser.

That's remarkable, as is the reason for the change:

The development is expected to be useful for overseas Koreans or foreigners logging on to Web sites such as www.hikorea.go.kr from aboard through alternate browsers. Operated by the Ministry of Justice, the Web site is a comprehensive online repository of information for oversea Koreans, immigrants and foreign nationals.

Some civic groups have consistently raised the need to consider expanding e-government services to users of non-traditional browsers.

While the percentage of Koreans users of alternative browsers is still minimal, more netizens worldwide are increasingly surfing the net on browsers other than the Internet Explorer.

A ministry report showed that 21.7 percent of Web users worldwide are browsing on FireFox, and 8 percent on Safari, a browser developed by Apple. IE users make up 67.4 percent of the total Web population.

"We believe that enabling minor browsers to host our e-government services will help overseas Koreans to access the assistance they need and increase Korea's status as a leader in e-government initiatives," a ministry official said.

This shows that what's happening outside a country can still have considerable influence on the internal market - provided there is a big enough expatriate community that still "calls home". Given the increasingly globalised nature of computing, that offers hope for other parts of the world that may be lagging in their uptake of open source.

And if you're wondering why it matters anyway that the South Koreans should be able to use Firefox and other "non-standard" browsers - don't you just love that description? - it's because the country's users have some of the fastest broadband connections in the world; that means that new applications based on such connectivity may well emerge there first, so it's important that open source be available and viable for all kinds of uses. (Via Asa Dotzler.)

Follow me @glynmoody on Twitter or identi.ca.

Firefox 3: the Great Paradise?

It's been hard to say until now, when Firefox 3 was more a hope than a project. But behold the Product Planning Doc for:

Firefox 3, code-named "Gran Paradiso", presently under development with an expected release in Q3 2007.

The salient bits of which are:

High-Level Feature Plan

The proposed major theme for Gran Paradiso is “improved information and content management”. This is the area that we’ll do the most innovation in. Gran Paradiso will continue to improve in areas where we’ve traditionally been strong in: security, usability, extensibility and customization, performance, web standards and compatibility.

Features for Gran Paradiso will fall into one of the following categories.

For Users

* Information Management includes Bookmarks, History, Content Handling, Content Editing, Printing and Microformats
* Security including Privacy, Phishing Protection, Addons and Password Management
* Usability/UI Improvements including Search, Tabbed Browsing, OS Integration & Accessibility
* Customization - ability to discover and manage addons
* Performance - how fast Firefox operates
* Localization - operating in non US English
* Installation & Auto-Update
* Support & Help

For Developers

* Web Standards & Compatibility (e.g. ACID2, CSS2.1, SVG via Gecko 1.9, EV certs, etc.)
* Web Developer Tools
* Extension Developer Tools

To say nothing of the cool name. (Via Read/WriteWeb.)

And the Firefoxiest Country is...Indonesia

While some people (like me) have been fixated on the jolly good work being done in Europe in terms of boosting Firefox's market share, it seems that they (I) have overlooked an even bigger success:

One aspect of our global expansion is in our user base. By the end of 2007, nearly fifty percent of Firefox users chose a language other than English. In a fast forward, the first country in which Firefox usage appears to have crossed the 50% mark is Indonesia, surpassing 50% in July 2008. A set of European countries (Sovenia, Poland, and Finland) see Firefox usage above 40%.

And let's not forget that Indonesia is (a) big and (b) getting bigger fast. Indonesian will arguably be the other major world language of the future (along with Mandarin, English, Hindustani, Spanish, Arabic, Russian and French).

FOOGL (Firefox, OpenOffice.org, GNU/Linux) Usability

First, we had the hugely-important, but horribly-named "Economic impact of FLOSS on innovation and competitiveness of the EU ICT sector" report, and now we have the equally horribly-named tOSSad F/OSS Usability report.

Since this is actually about Firefox, OpenOffice.org and GNU/Linux, they should, of course, have called it the FOOGL Usability Report. Despite this monumental gaffe, it does include some very useful information about usability, traditionally viewed as free software's Achilles Heel:

The survey showed that the majority of respondents agree that all three products have sufficient number of features and are user-friendly in general. Among the positive features of Firefox and OpenOffice.org are their user-friendly graphical interfaces. These include menus with clear definitions and abbreviations, and logical navigation of the main and context menus. OpenOffice.org and Firefox was also considered to have a sufficient set of features and are easy to install.

Regarding GNU/Linux, the survey results show that in average there is a positive opinion among the survey respondents in terms of installation, information presentation, navigation and the overall impression from the operating system. Therefore it can be concluded that the more experience users have with GNU/Linux, the more positive is their opinion of it.

However, respondents also mentioned gaps in the usability area of these products. For some users, one of the GNU/Linux’s disadvantages is the difficulty of installation of hardware and the learning curve needed in the process of migration from the MS Windows interface. OpenOffice.org also has some issues with insufficient performance compared to MS Office, according to the respondents.

Apart from sole usability aspects, the survey discovered that there is a need for more information about which F/OSS programs represent alternatives to their commercial counterparts. The survey also showed that no charge and the GNU General Public License (GPL) remain the main reasons for switching to F/OSS products.

(Via Erwin Tenhumberg.)