The history and legacy of the Church in the late 1990s and 2000s will be lost in 10 years because we will lack the software to open its’ data.
Check out this Microsoft KB article. It describes a (very complicated, very technical) process for reconfiguring your computer after Office 2003 Service Pack 3 quietly disables the ability to open certain older file formats. I’m certain that my grandma can follow that to access the old recipes she typed into her computer 10 years ago, aren’t you?
I’ve been warning people for a long time about the danger of relying upon proprietary software to maintain access to archived data. If you don’t control the format or the software, there’s no guarantee that you will be able to access your data in the future. Case in point: I have a number of old school files created using Lotus Word Pro 97. I still own a copy of the software, but the only Windows operating system I have is XP, and LWP97 won’t install on Windows XP. So I have files, software to read the files, and yet I can’t get access to my own data. Presumably I could pay someone to make conversion software, but why should I pay a second time to access my data?
The church has thousands of copies and fragments of manuscripts of the New Testament. We’ve retained the ability to access the physical data (paper/papyrus is universal and long-lasting) and the format (they make me study Koine Greek), so there’s little risk of that original data being lost. But for tens of thousands of sermons written every Sunday and stored in proprietary file formats, that data may be available next week and next year, but what about ten years? Twenty? Will you still be able to access CD-ROM drives or your current hard drive? Will you continue shelling out for Microsoft Office 2017, no matter what they charge you for it? If you do, will they turn off access to your old data’s file format one day without asking you?
The solution is simple: open standards.
1. Begin thinking about how you can use open source software, which doesn’t cost any money at all, to replace closed source alternatives that will only lock you into proprietary formats. For example, use OpenOffice instead of Microsoft Office. It’s just as good as Microsoft Office for most tasks, and best of all, it’s free!
2. Save your files in ODT (OpenDocument) format, a popular open-source document format that any programmer can implement for free, so that there will always be software to open your old documents. That’s what many US states and other national governments are beginning to do.
3. Always, always keep good backups and migrate those backups to new mediums promptly so that you don’t have 5.25″ floppy disks hanging around anymore. Right now, your files should be stored on CDs and hard drives, not 3.5″ floppies, 5.25″ floppies, ZIP disks, LS120 disks, etc.
Nice thought!
I must admit that proprietary software do pose a risk, but as far as i can gather that we need a format, a format that will be used by all, no matter open source or proprietary.
So the on-going battle b/w MS and ODT is all about this, but what will happen if one wins?what will happen to the other docs in the other format?
So my thought is uniformity, and true to core, we cannot guess what technology will be after 20 years! so its better churches start storing everything in papyrus only!
At least that does not reqiures a format to open and read…
Nice thought!
I must admit that proprietary software do pose a risk, but as far as i can gather that we need a format, a format that will be used by all, no matter open source or proprietary.
So the on-going battle b/w MS and ODT is all about this, but what will happen if one wins?what will happen to the other docs in the other format?
So my thought is uniformity, and true to core, we cannot guess what technology will be after 20 years! so its better churches start storing everything in papyrus only!
At least that does not reqiures a format to open and read…
“but why should I pay a second time to access my data?”
Because you were forced to pay the first time. It’s called capitalism. It’s where companies like Microsoft talk any old rubbish to sell you any old rubbish.
I’ve seen that before somewhere….
“but why should I pay a second time to access my data?”
Because you were forced to pay the first time. It’s called capitalism. It’s where companies like Microsoft talk any old rubbish to sell you any old rubbish.
I’ve seen that before somewhere….
I just started a series of posts on my blog on why churches should be using open source. Great to see others talking about it too.
I just started a series of posts on my blog on why churches should be using open source. Great to see others talking about it too.
[...] January 3, 2008 by countryparson I saw this post about churches moving to open source this morning. [...]
I would like to convert our Church to open source, but what about accounting packages that require Microsoft. The Software developers have to support opensource also. Not just about sermons, Church is a big business and requires many programs to run on their computer systems.
Good points. However, this advice may not go far enough. As someone has pointed out, “The great thing about standards is that there are so many to choose from.” This applies in the open source arena as well. Sure, I might not have to “pay” for document conversion, but if a standard I depend on never really catches on and is decremented ten years from now, is my grandmother ready to do the software engineering necessary to convert those old documents?
Whenever the opportunity arises, I try to educate users toward the principles of simplicity and proven endurance. For instance, ASCII is forever. It has obvious limitations for true documents, but by saving with minimal formatting (for instance, line feeds only at the end of paragraphs), it imports easily back into any word processor for reformatting as needed. So I encourage people to save any copies of any enduring documents in text format, regardless of what other format they use.
After ASCII, consider RTF (Rich Text Format) or HTML. Either of these are broadly supported, and will allow enough formatting for all but the most complex documents.
Last on the list should be proprietary or relatively new standards. I cannot emphasize enough that, regardless of anything else, standards endure by popularity far more than technical merit. Lotus Word Pro 97 was a great example. Because of its limited sales and use, new applications don’t see any need to support this format in their conversion modules.
For more advanced software (spreadsheets, project management, databases, etc.), as much as it hurts to say this, users with limited technical abilities may be best advised to go with Microsoft. They will pay more, but trust me, MS Word 2007 has no problems reading MS Word 97 (or older) documents.
Finally, if an organization is far-sighted, they can save the money they would have spent on software and re-invest a small portion of it in open source software and periodic technical / operational reviews. Most churches are in far more danger of losing ten years of documents because they keep them on old computers with no backups than because of standards obsolescence.
I would like to convert our Church to open source, but what about accounting packages that require Microsoft. The Software developers have to support opensource also. Not just about sermons, Church is a big business and requires many programs to run on their computer systems.
Good points. However, this advice may not go far enough. As someone has pointed out, “The great thing about standards is that there are so many to choose from.” This applies in the open source arena as well. Sure, I might not have to “pay” for document conversion, but if a standard I depend on never really catches on and is decremented ten years from now, is my grandmother ready to do the software engineering necessary to convert those old documents?
Whenever the opportunity arises, I try to educate users toward the principles of simplicity and proven endurance. For instance, ASCII is forever. It has obvious limitations for true documents, but by saving with minimal formatting (for instance, line feeds only at the end of paragraphs), it imports easily back into any word processor for reformatting as needed. So I encourage people to save any copies of any enduring documents in text format, regardless of what other format they use.
After ASCII, consider RTF (Rich Text Format) or HTML. Either of these are broadly supported, and will allow enough formatting for all but the most complex documents.
Last on the list should be proprietary or relatively new standards. I cannot emphasize enough that, regardless of anything else, standards endure by popularity far more than technical merit. Lotus Word Pro 97 was a great example. Because of its limited sales and use, new applications don’t see any need to support this format in their conversion modules.
For more advanced software (spreadsheets, project management, databases, etc.), as much as it hurts to say this, users with limited technical abilities may be best advised to go with Microsoft. They will pay more, but trust me, MS Word 2007 has no problems reading MS Word 97 (or older) documents.
Finally, if an organization is far-sighted, they can save the money they would have spent on software and re-invest a small portion of it in open source software and periodic technical / operational reviews. Most churches are in far more danger of losing ten years of documents because they keep them on old computers with no backups than because of standards obsolescence.
Here’s a church which has taken the “open” to their own content, allowing anyone to use what they create for free – how cool. http://open.lifechurch.tv/
Here’s a church which has taken the “open” to their own content, allowing anyone to use what they create for free – how cool. http://open.lifechurch.tv/
The point that religious organizations have even more reasons than others has been already raised. Please check out:
http://www.linux.com/feature/49533
http://www.linux.com/feature/53644
http://www.eleutheros.it (suggested reading: home page, manifesto and faq, in this order)
I look forward to hear from you if there are further developments.
Happy 2008,
Marco Fioretti
The point that religious organizations have even more reasons than others has been already raised. Please check out:
http://www.linux.com/feature/49533
http://www.linux.com/feature/53644
http://www.eleutheros.it (suggested reading: home page, manifesto and faq, in this order)
I look forward to hear from you if there are further developments.
Happy 2008,
Marco Fioretti
Here are some earlier thoughts on this theme:
http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/7653
http://www.linux.com/articles/38595
http://searchenterpriselinux.techtarget.com/originalContent/0,289142,sid39_gci990899,00.html
http://www.lulu.com/dcparris or
http://matheteuo.org/download.php?view.1
And, of course…
http://matheteuo.org/download.php?view.2
The book (PitP) points to a larger community of Christians geared toward fostering FOSS usage.
Blessings,
Don
Here are some earlier thoughts on this theme:
http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/7653
http://www.linux.com/articles/38595
http://searchenterpriselinux.techtarget.com/originalContent/0,289142,sid39_gci990899,00.html
http://www.lulu.com/dcparris or
http://matheteuo.org/download.php?view.1
And, of course…
http://matheteuo.org/download.php?view.2
The book (PitP) points to a larger community of Christians geared toward fostering FOSS usage.
Blessings,
Don
[...] Here is another serious complaint about this forced upgrade stunt, followed by some suggestions. The solution is simple: open standards. [...]
@Byron@ – there are various open-source softwares for accounting. For example: GNU-cash. (However, I don’t really use accounting software so I can’t recommend it.) If you unfortunately think of a church as a business, requiring professional quality software, there are various open-source (and both free and hi-quality) alternatives out there. For example, instead of PhotoShop, why not try the Gimp? There are also guides out in the web to help someone make the transition…
@Byron@ – there are various open-source softwares for accounting. For example: GNU-cash. (However, I don’t really use accounting software so I can’t recommend it.) If you unfortunately think of a church as a business, requiring professional quality software, there are various open-source (and both free and hi-quality) alternatives out there. For example, instead of PhotoShop, why not try the Gimp? There are also guides out in the web to help someone make the transition…
[...] Perché è importante usare standard aperti (ed essere contrari a OOXML) Archiviato in: Microsoft, Open Source, cosi’ va il mondo — lbell @ 23:26 La fine del supporto a certi tipi di “vecchi” formati di file decretata da Microsoft, fa riflettere sull’utilità di impiegare formati proprietari per memorizzare i documenti. In un altro blog leggo che decine di documenti religiosi e scolastici a causa di questa decisione rischiano di essere perduti perché fra qualche tempo non esisteranno più programmi in grado di leggerli, mentre gli atti più vecchi scritti su carta possono essere tranquillamente consultati. [...]
[...] « Three steps to Open Source in the Church [...]
[...] Three steps to Open Source in the Church [...]
Scott McCluskey mentioned your interest in open software and your background in programming as well as your participating in discussions about WTS computing. Keep up the good work. I have keen interest in open software. One area I find useful is web-based collaborative software and my current favorite is mindmeister.com which allows free limited usage for mapping on the web and links to freemind (among others). I have created a MM for open/free software. I will send you an invitation which allows you to contribute and modify the map. I would be interested in any additions you may have and also your classifying freedomware and freeware the various sites if you have time.
I have yet to read all your blogs but I will be doing so.
Scott McCluskey mentioned your interest in open software and your background in programming as well as your participating in discussions about WTS computing. Keep up the good work. I have keen interest in open software. One area I find useful is web-based collaborative software and my current favorite is mindmeister.com which allows free limited usage for mapping on the web and links to freemind (among others). I have created a MM for open/free software. I will send you an invitation which allows you to contribute and modify the map. I would be interested in any additions you may have and also your classifying freedomware and freeware the various sites if you have time.
I have yet to read all your blogs but I will be doing so.