This post is taken from a response to a comment I made on this blog post at ChurchIT. It embodies much of why I want to do this blog. We as Christians just don’t think about the business models used to deliver the products we buy and what values those business models support. I obviously believe we should think about it and that when we do think about it, the decision to use open source culture rather than closed culture become obvious. Enjoy the post.
OK, so I wanted to take some time to revisit my comment about Microsoft and Apple being “evil” and I’ll go ahead and apologize for the length, but thanks in advance for reading or at least skimming it.
I’m mainly focusing on John’s response to my comment:
Calling companies or individuals evil is a poor tactic. I could probably find plenty of “evil” people in the Linux community. Let’s make sure we’re Christ-like in our discusson and stick to the facts.
So this is my attempt to clarify my position, “stick to the facts” and be “Christ-like”. I tried to only talk about what was completely necessary, but I know that this is probably a new way to think about this issue for many of you so keeping it too short can cause confusion as evidenced by John’s response to my last comment. Speaking of which, before I go on I think it would be helpful to clarify a few things about my initial comment:
1) Even taking my comment completely seriously, I didn’t mean that Microsoft and Apple are absolutely evil in all aspects. I would think this would be obvious as there are always good and bad about anything (except God). On the other hand, as Christians, it’s obvious (at least to me) that we should be lining up corporate ethics and business practices with biblical values and if they don’t match up, they can be considered “evil” as a general term. Just like a person, a company can be judged by the fruit it bears (sorry Apple, pun intended)
2) I’ll strike my comment about Steve Jobs from the record. Talking about specific people confuses the issue that I’m really talking about which is the business ethics of the companies, not the personal ethics or morality of anyone working for the company. While Steve Jobs’ public comments and attitudes are synonymous with Apple’s as he has chosen to be the face of Apple, I’ll ignore that fact to get to the issue I’m talking about: corporate ethics and business practices. I’m not attacking or judging any person. Period.
OK, now for the good stuff. First, I won’t go into detail about why the business ethics of Microsoft or Apple are evil. That’s already been discussed at length and here is a good summary article about Microsoft from the Free Software Foundation.
If you think Apple is any different, here’s a recent article from Newsweek that basically gushes about Apple products, but mentions in several places how proprietary, litigous and unmerciful Apple can be. While there are differences in the two companies, they share many similarities in how they do business.
I’ll summarize the position by saying that in general Microsoft and Apple have business practices that are unforgiving, unmerciful, overly litigous, self-serving, greedy…the list could go on. Again, while some positive adjectives could be thrown in there (again, they aren’t completely evil in their business practices), I think it’s safe to say that the former list doesn’t mirror biblical values very well at all. Now you ask, “but aren’t they just being good business by doing so…competition is fierce and they need to compete?”. And of course the answer is a resounding “YES!”. They are being good businesses according to secular standards. Of course, the Bible doesn’t tell us to be good businesses and to make a lot of money for our investors, does it? As Christians, we’re called to be different from the world. That means our whole lives. How and where we and our churches spend our money supports a set of values that should hopefully match our personal beliefs. Shouldn’t it?
The other part of this discussion is the comment relating to the fact that Ubuntu and Linux isn’t any different from Microsoft and Apple. Yeah, I beg to differ…surprised?! Probably not.
We’ll talk about Ubuntu explicitly for discussions sake, but most, if not all, of the arguments translate to any company using a purely open source business model (of which there are many).
Ubuntu uses completely free, open-source software in their business model. In order to make money, you pay Ubuntu for services, not the software itself. What this means is that while Ubuntu controls their distribution, they don’t control the licensing of their software. Their licensing comes from the author and contributors of the different projects that chose to make their software open-source. As long as Ubuntu complies with the open-source licensing terms (mainly, to make any derivative works also open source), they can use the software however they choose for commercial purposes. The beauty of this model is that:
1) If I can’t afford services, I can still get the software absolutely free (i.e. you have more time than money). I don’t have to break the law to use the software. This helps the poor and less fortunate in many ways. Helping the poor is a biblical value.
2) If I decide that Ubuntu becomes “evil”, I can move to a distribution that isn’t so “evil” because the software is available to anyone that complies to the open source license. This allows me, as a Christian, to choose to support companies that use open source software in ways that mirror Christian values (whether they are doing so purposefully or not). In fact, if I decide Ubuntu is “evil”, I can actually create my own derivative distribution of Ubuntu and create the “NotSoEvilUbuntu” company and do the same thing Ubuntu is doing, with the same software and compete with them. I can also just choose not to support the company by choosing not to pay for services. On the other hand, Microsoft and Apple deliberately use business methods that limit choice and sometimes even force you to use their product (ever tried getting someone else to open a spreadsheet you created in other than Microsoft Excel format?). Freedom to choose is a biblical value.
3) The company has no licensing rights over the software, so Ubuntu can’t sue any one for using, copying, or redistributing the software unless they do so in greedy ways (ex. they don’t comply with the open source license). Punishing greed is a biblical value.
4) Open source business models serve the community as well as the company’s profits. Serving the community is a biblical value.
While there are others, those are the big hitters. Of course, there are lots of “good” and “evil” people in the Ubuntu community. Additionally, open source projects and business models aren’t Christian in and of themselves. However, at a minimum, the business models supported by open source software and culture are much closer to biblical values than proprietary models and many aspects of open source culture mirror principles from the Bible very directly (that subject is what my blog is all about). Therefore, I must conclude that open source companies like Ubuntu are not “evil” or at least much less “evil” by their very nature than companies with proprietary business models like Microsoft and Apple. If I must conclude that, then it seems as Christians it should be a consideration for the decision on which software, hardware, etc. we use, especially in our churches (even if the technical and financial considerations say otherwise).
And for me that leads me to always avoid proprietary software when an open source alternative exists and using the least proprietary solution when OS alternatives aren’t available. Of course, more companies are using hybrid (open-source AND proprietary) business models, so it’s not always a clear case like the one above). In fact, Microsoft and Apple have even been partially forced on the open source bandwagon through competition.
Of course the only reason I brought this all up is that John only mentioned technical and financial considerations in his review of a PC or Mac only environment (including his miniscule review of Linux). Since this is ChurchIT.com and not IT.com, I expect there to be other considerations besides what the secular world would consider. That’s really it. If I want general IT advice, I’ll go somewhere else…here I expect advice that’s not only applicable to church use cases, but also centered on Christ-like values and in this post, I personally found it wanting.
Let the flaming commence…I wouldn’t post things like this if I couldn’t take the heat. 
Please feel free to comment here as well on the ChurchIT post.
Tags: apple, business, business models, church, community, corporate, culture, ethics, microsoft, open source, ubuntu
![[FSF Associate Member]](http://opensourcechurch.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/fsfmember.png){kind=small}
First off it’s good to see the blog and one specifically on OpenSource stuff.
Secondly, when I saw your initial comment I too thought it was all in jest but that perhaps it was a bit ‘bare knuckled’ at the same time.
I did want to pick up on the idea of is Ubuntu evil or not though. Ultimately companies history, directions, etos, etc are a great deal to do with teh founders of said companies so if one sees Apple as evil then ultimately that would equate to Steve Jobs and vice versa.
So is Ubuntu evil? I have no idea and I’m not implying it either but if one is going to make a meal out of what companies like Windows and Apple are or are not then equally one needs to make the same meal for all.
Defending Ubuntu as bieng biblical without actually checking its background – you may have but don’t state this – is not on
Equally, making money from your business that you can plow back into your church for the betterment of the kingdom is a biblical principle. Look at Billy G – he’s giving away half his fortune made from business as Mark Shuttleworth has used his fortune (made from selling Thawte) to start Ubuntu – I see no difference.
HOWEVER – your implied point about being prudent with out resources is one I totally agree with.
Let me add this – as a personal example, if my church had Ubuntu based desktops I would get far more fault calls than them having Windows ones. Sure, the issues tend to be bigger when I get them but as the staff are mostly IT literate they know how to google and follow instructions. My support of these would not be prudent of my resources (time given freely) in respect to my family.
I think it is this that most OS evangelists tend to neglect / fudge / miss when discussing why their way is the better way. Not every church IT geek knows or wants to know *nix so using it in their instance would be unwise…. if that makes them or anyone evil then …..!
I’ll get me coat now.
Hi Stuart,
First, THANK YOU! I appreciate you being willing to engage in this conversation. You covered a lot of ground with your post. I’ll be touching on many things you brought up in future posts. These are complex issues that don’t always have one simple answer for sure and it will take some time to unpack.
It’s also good to know when I’m being perceived as “bare knuckled.” There’s a fine line between pushing people past their comfort zone so that they think about things differently and are hopefully called to action instead of turning them away because they are offended. I’m still figuring out a lot about where that line is so that I can effectively communicate the importance of open source culture in the lives of Christians. Thanks again for your feedback.
I would like to go ahead and respond to a couple things in your comment.
First, I definitely can’t comment in totality about whether Ubuntu is “evil” or not either. As you mention, there are a lot of factors that go into that equation including past decisions (and possible apologies for those decisions), people in leadership, how they do business, etc. That is never a black or white issue and if we are looking for the “perfect” company to support before we do anything we will never buy anything because it doesn’t exist. You could liken it to the passage in Romans about “all have sinned and fallen short.” That is why I tried to limit this discussion simply to the business models of the company.
As business models go, I think I did “make the same meal for all.” The core of the “evilness” or lack thereof is based in the nature of how each company does business. Microsoft and Apple are built on (and really the epitomy of) closed, proprietary, litigous (I would add selfish) culture. Ubuntu is built on open, free, shared, community (i.e. unselfish) culture. That very nature (not the specific actions or decisions) of their business models is what I’m talking about. When you limit the conversation to that, I think it’s at least much closer to a black and white issue and therefore, you get the hardline title for the article.
When we are making decisions about software though, the morality of their business models isn’t the trump all card either. As you mention, there are many other technical, financial, and moral considerations that factor into the decision. This post was in context to a discussion about what factors are used to choose our software platform. I was just hoping that moral and ethical considersations would be added to the list of things that factor into the decision…not that they are the only considerations. As you alluded to, sometimes the technical and financial are also moral in their basis.
I would also like to push a little harder on this comment:
“Not every church IT geek knows or wants to know *nix so using it in their instance would be unwise”
I think you could draw an analogy of someone (let’s say a church admin for discussion purposes) that knows Microsoft Office products. You can do a lot with the Office products as a church admin: bulletins, flyers, finance, etc. On the other hand their are specific desktop publishing applications like InDesign or Scribus that might do much better for some or many of his tasks. Now, initially learning and using a desktop publishing application would slow him down and make things less productive. On the other hand, if that initial investment is made then he has a larger and much more powerful toolset. Now, is this person wise or unwise for sticking with what they know?
Lastly, I wanted to make sure you know that I’m not saying that “[their software choices] makes them or anyone evil.” Again, these are complex issues that effect different people many different ways. However, just ignoring certain aspects of the conversation isn’t the answer either. As a part of this blog, some of my goal is to rethink digital ethics and where we’ve ended up. That doesn’t mean we or anyone else is evil for getting where we’re at. However, we as Christians should always be testing things to see if we need course correction. I’m more concerned for the direction of the arrow rather than where the arrow might currently be placed. Obviously, I think a course away from closed, proprietary culture and a little closer to open source culture would be healthy and helpful (and in the end more Christ-like).
Thanks again for the post,
Kevin
Right – promise this reply won’t be as long as my first
First off, I understand the ‘bare knuckle’ struggle as I’ve been down that path many a tme in my past. There was a time when I was able to offend folks (unintentionally) by discussing the weather with them! Bizarre.
But, back to matters. Thanks for teh clarification on some points but just want to pick up on your admin analogy. I hear you, I really do and would tend to agree. But, the issue here is more than just investment. What if they don’t have te time? Themoney? The intelligence? the…. well whatever it is that hinders (and FWIW I don’t agree with the arguments that ‘you can always make time to train’ and ‘you only limit yourself by not training’) that person. Maybe it’s just lack of interest. Is that still unwise? Maybe it is but I don’t think that is such a clear cut thing.
Equally, if said admin is volunteer then it is entirely posisble that their hands are tied by other factors.
I used to believe absolutely in black and whites with no grey areas at all. These days I have many grey areas, the least of which isthe hair on my head!
Lastly, I hope you didn’t read into my words that I thought you were saying “their choices were evil”. Agreed though that we do need to thing about our choices and consider what is appropriate / best for each situation. I can see some local churches to me working best with open source and others with closed systems. Horses for courses and not everyone is going to ever agree. I find myself being in the are’ish position of using what I beleive fits best for any given circumstance / budget be that InDesign or Word or Scribus or …!
Peace, out.
Hi Stuart,
Just a quick response to your post.
1) Intelligence – I’m assuming if you can pick up the complexities of proprietary software that intelligence isn’t a problem. If the open source alternative is well developed (which many open source alternatives are), then it is just different, not harder.
2) Money – Since open source is almost always free or less expensive, this shouldn’t be an issue
3) Time – This is about the only real good “excuse” for not doing what I propose. However, time management really comes down to priorities, not time. We make time for what is a priority. I also think it’s safe to say that there is still wiggle room in most of our schedules. The blunt point I’m trying to make is that the morality and ethics of our software decisions should be a priority over probably many things we already include in our lives. While family wouldn’t be trumped by learning new software, playing around with a new gadget or researching possibly buying new gadget would be…we like to believe that our lives are full of massively important things, but the truth is usually there’s a lot of stuff in our schedules we just like to do that couldn’t (or even shouldn’t) be a high priority (I have a wife and 2 kids under 2, I think I’ve at least a glimpse of this balance).
Just to be even more blunt, I think it really just comes down to laziness. We’re fat, dumb and happy the way things are. It’s not that we couldn’t learn new software or really have any good excuse. We just don’t want to. I think almost any excuse that anyone can come up with is just a facade for being too lazy to try it and too unconcerned to care. Contrarily, we should care as Christians because it does matter and it is an ethical issue. We should be doing everything we can (which may not be much at first). That doesn’t mean we have to do everything right off the bat, but it does mean we should be doing something to point ourselves toward open, free culture and away from closed, proprietary culture.
Now that was very black and white…I’m not trying to be that way, but because we have to discuss specifics it gets that way. Of course, there’s certain situations when the above rules don’t apply. However, for most of us, they do apply in at least some situations. I don’t expect everyone to be able to shift completely to open source, but the reality is the large majority of us could if we chose to…but we don’t. And if the majority that could do something did, my hunch is that it would be much easier for the others as well.
Basically, you’re trying to take corner cases that apply to a few in order to make excuses for everyone. My goal isn’t to convince the corner cases. I want to convince the majority. If you or anybody else is the corner case, then don’t worry about it…but the truth is that we like to think we are corner cases when really we’re just lazy and comfortable with what we’ve got.
Hope that didn’t come across as taking the gloves off…it wasn’t meant to,
Kevin
You are a gem.
Even WIRED has noticed Apple’s Evil-ness…maybe I’m not so far off of the mainstream after all.
http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2010/05/5-suggestions-apple/
On a very related note, a Columbia law professor has labeled Apple as the #1 threat to internet freedom.
Have 1st hand experience from seeing people use linux for the 1st time, GUI only. Most did not really care, could figure it out. They taught themselves afterwards. As long as there are some critical mass of people in a community knowing the software available, it will fly.
If there is some technical resistence to a product MS, Apple or Linux it will not fly. I use linux, ms and apple in my work as I’m supporting all 3 environments at work. Most designs I do will include FOSS software as they are the best out there. As for the OS I would stick with the one that is best pleasing to work with and in a church env that does not cost extra.