To begin this perspective, I must wish the e-pao team, a very prosperous New Year 2006.

The software industry is growing very fast and the revolution of competing each other is also going at the same pace. Besides the revolution of replicating the commercial software [not_free_of_cost] is also populating in an exponential way especially in India.

Microsoft [and other commercial organizations] is burning the mid-night oils with sweats and toils for their software and in return they demanded the cost, which is worth of their labor, if we 're going to use it.

This is their philosophy. Nothing should go free of cost other than some samples and template demos. But we often find using most of the finest Microsoft products like operating system, office Tools without paying anything but simply installing at the knowledge that they're not going to dig us.

I heard you're saying that I might be typing this mail from the same non-ethical 'Microsoft Word'. Believe me I'm typing this mail from corporate product only. Otherwise I hope I will send this mail from open-office [a free Microsoft Word like editor] or some open-source editor.

It really becomes a sub-conscious tradition to most of the computer-vendor-assemblers to deliver the computer system with everything [commercial/non-commercial] demanded by the customers on the idea so as to finish their stock as soon as possible. I'm talking specifically about 'Assemblars'. They only see profits and partly from this very ideology also that the end-users are not conscious about the proprietary of the software, which are installed on their system.

If I say, " I want to have 'Windows XP' ", they are on the position to install it free of cost. We also don't care about the ethical aspects of using this software because we can get these things without any hassle. Somebody somewhere is making this proprietary software and on the other we're using it without caring his or her copyrighted stuffs.

Is it ethical or religious??

Well, I cannot deny the fact that I also had been using this software for a long time. I come to know I had done un-ethical stuffs out of my ignorance. Now I come to know the values of someone's labor or you can say intention. Whether to stop using it or not depends on your religious-ethical ideology. Doing/Going a logical-sensible path is up to you.

But I do know that 'sensibility' do plays a major role in the character of an individual. For me I've stopped using it. But it doesn't imply to me preventing using equivalent-software of those. Because we've a free open stock of those-equivalent public software, where one can distribute/use as many times he wants or modify those if he's capable and distribute as his own to others- The Free Software Foundation [FSF].

Mind you, getting free of cost doesn't imply the ineffectiveness of the end product. The Linux system is the testimony to it. It is growing very fast since its inception. The system is created out of open-source software only- the software in it are available free of cost and we generally called 'GNU/Software'.

If you hear about the open-source revolution, I bet the open-source system is having the same equivalent software of various commercial organizations, with free of cost but without sacrificing the effectiveness and robustness of the software. There are two schools of thoughts as far as software proprietary is concerned. One is commercial school and the other is Open Source System.

Let me tell you that the biggest rivals of Microsoft are those who're endorsing open-source technologies, like IBM, SUN, Novell, Adobe etc. why they're endorsing these open-source despite their commercial inheritance is up to their ideology and I guess they know the real prowess and abilities of these software. Otherwise it would affect their reputation of customer's satisfaction.

This is again another testimony to the success of open-source evolution. I'm going to talk about too much on open-source because I feel it is the future for us. It is the one. If you're dying on Microsoft and could afford any penny for their product, you could do that. By saying about open-source, I don't imply/compel/forbid others using commercial software.

The only thing I'm expressing is to use our sensibility in choosing the correct/logical path. I'm just saying that it's better to follow the correct/sensible way without affecting others in any way. I'm just saying that if we were following the wrong way sub-consciously, it would make a great pit in our future.

The wrong way is nothing but using the commercial software illegally/piratedly. Why do I say we're following a wrong way [if we use the Microsoft product without affording any price]?? This is the same thing as stealing someone's property and enjoying in the hope that the owner cannot dig us. Right. Yes, I know this is true.

This is not being questioned for the last decade or so because we're so accustomed to the present system that we couldn't able to distinguish right from wrong. Even if we know that it's wrong, we've no choice other than using it. This again clearly implies that our system is not aware of the great 'open-source' revolution going brightly across the globe.

We feel that Microsoft is the best. Microsoft is the only one providing all the computer stuffs. This again is a manifestation of computer ignorance. What do you say?. Till date, i don't find any thought of like this coming from our venerable university/college lecturer/professor or any computer techies.

This is ridiculous and perhaps there could be a 'satirical' story if i could invest some time on this logic. This is not an issue of knowing computer fundamentals like *stupid* software-enginnering or *elegant* OS. This is an ethical aspect -the question of what's right and wrong.

This can be raised even by a common people also if they know it. I meant is that the layman doesn't understand the software proprietary/legal issue. They only use it. But we, the computer users know it. i bet there're lots of computer institute populating like anything in our state.

I don't know how many of them are using the Microsoft products legally. I don't have any personal enmity with Microsoft. I really admire Microsoft. The only thing it bothers me is they're very showy and ostentatious.

That's all. I do feel that we should not label them as otherwise. Why should we? They're producing the software. They don't make it free. It's their philosophy. That's it.

But let them produce the software. Let anyone capable of affording the software-price use it. But for those who cannot afford it, let's do know and understand that there's another more_big_than Microsoft called 'Open-Source' system.

They're open for public in the sense that anyone irrespective of caste, religeon, sex, marital-status or any human-oriented-barrier can used it. Anyone who is capable can change the software and even can distribute also.

This freedom is not so in Microsoft and its parties. See the most successful kid of open-source - Linux. It's often called a programmer's paradise because anything related to 'programming' is lying over there. Mind you, Linux is not only for computer people.

It is always targeting the common audience also. We can find all the Microsoft-like software like Office, Win-Amp, Media Player, desktop utilities etc

At the last, I would like to say that we know the facts lying over there, in front of us. The truth is there and the choice is also with you.

If you're doing the things previously with sub-conscious mind-set, that's another thing. You got the point now.

The choice is with you.

Whether you want to go your life ethically is also up to you.