What Richard Stallman Wants for Christmas

Bruce Byfield has an interesting write-up of the FSF's High Priority Free Software Projects.

Projects make this list "because there is no adequate free placement," the list's home page explains, which means that "users are continually being seduced into using non-free software."

He concludes with the just observation:

Personally, I find the current list both encouraging and depressing. On the one hand, it is encouraging in that relatively few items affect daily computing for the average user. Moreover, the fact that free software is in reasonable enough shape that it can start thinking beyond immediate needs and worry about such things as the BIOS is a sign of progress.

On the other hand, it is discouraging because progress sometimes seems slow. Video drivers have been a problem for years, and the improvements, while real, are also painfully slow. Similarly, Gnash has not yet developed to the stage where it can rival Adobe's Flash reader, despite several years of work.

Still, over time, the list reflects progress. For instance, since Sun announced last year that it was releasing the Java code, you will no longer find support for free Java implementations listed. By comparing the current list with previous ones, you can get a sense of the gradual evolution of free software, seeing where it's been and where it is heading. For a GNU/Linux watcher, it remains an invaluable resource.

Manifesto for Free Appliances

More open goodness:

Just as there is a need for Free Software, there is a need for free (as in speech) appliances.

Free Appliances can be modified or enhanced using GNU/Linux tools or other Open Source Software, preferably licensed as GPLv3. They have no binaries without source code. They adhere to generally accepted standards as much as possible. Their documentation is open. They favor open file formats since information in open file formats should not require DRM. They do not use proprietary components when there are generic ones widely available. (For example: batteries should be replaceable.)

We need to know that products that we use have no hidden functionality and that we can enjoy their full capability and value. Such devices must be open because that is the only way their functionality can be verified and audited. Procedures need to be available to assure that no malware has been introduced. In the event that user modifications go wrong, there must be a simple user reset of the device to its original state.

Examples include smart house, open telephone, wearable computer, emergency alarm and a "freed computer":

By now it should be possible to configure a computer which is completely free. It should have a free BIOS, hardware with open drivers, and a complete complement of freed software.

Open BIOSes

BIOS: Basic Input/Output System. We rarely give it a thought as we boot up a machine. But it turns out that there's a lot of clutter in your common or garden BIOS that GNU/Linux in particular could do with out. As this excellent article explains:

On many systems, a large portion of boot time goes into providing legacy support for MS-DOS. Various projects, including LinuxBIOS and Open Firmware, are trying to replace the proprietary BIOS systems with streamlined pieces of code able to do only what is necessary to get a Linux kernel loaded and running.

Of course: if you've got an open operating system, it makes sense to use an open BIOS. I don't think I'll hold my breath waiting for PC manufacturers to offer that particular option, though. (Via OSNews.)