Open Source Software-Based Assistive Technologies
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
July 7 th , 2010. Open Source Software-Based Assistive Technologies By Fernando H. F. Botelho Defining open source software 'Open' and 'open source' are terms that are occasionally misused for their marketing value, so it is important to start by offering a basic definition of the type of software and development strategy they describe when used correctly. Source code i refers to the commands that exist behind any software package, regardless of whether it is a web browser, game, or spreadsheet application. When it is said that the source, or source code is open, it means that a government, foundation, company, or individual is distributing not just the final product, the software, but also the recipe that created it, the source code. The idea behind open source, or Free and Open Source Software (FOSS), is that making the source code available, any individual, company ii , organization iii , or government iv can understand how the software works, suggest and make improvements v to it, and even distribute its own version under a different name. To make this feasible from a legal point of view, the source code is licensed under a type of copyright that specifically allows for copying, modification, and distribution by any person or entity. The most widely used license of this kind is the General Public License or GPL vi . FOSS technology is often assumed to be free--from a financial point of view--but the term 'free' in FOSS refers to the freedom to modify and change the software rather than its cost. The fact that many FOSS products also happen to be given away freely is just a consequence of the fact that no single entity controls distribution or pricing and therefore most rely on business models vii that do not depend on such restrictions. Open source business model and sustainability Although at first the open source strategy does not seem conducive to profitability or sustainability, there are more than three decades viii of examples ix ranging from the Internet itself to OpenOffice x and Firefox xi proving its viability. Some companies xii , governments xiii , or individuals invest in open source software development because it saves them money in the medium term, others do not want to depend on and feel vulnerable xiv to companies selling proprietary software, and others are profitable thanks to technical support, training, and software customization contracts. There are numerous examples of businesses that are extremely successful even if their products can be replicated by most people. Businesses ranging from educational institutions to bakeries compete mostly on reputation and factors such as geographical location and customer convenience rather than the use of secret formulas. Finally, since companies and organizations that sell, support, or use open source products benefit from each others investments, they have lower costs and more competitive pricing in the marketplace. Typology of open source assistive technology projects and products Open source assistive technology solutions are developed by a wide range of governments xv , corporations xvi , foundations xvii , and individuals xviii . While individuals, organizations, foundations, and governments often select this model in order to maximize the benefits to society of their initiative, companies xix pursue open source due to a mix xx of corporate social responsibility and interest in government sales. We estimate that the company that has distributed open source assistive technologies most widely is Canonical, developer of the Ubuntu xxi Linux Distribution. This is because their version of Linux is the most popular version of that operating system and every copy brings with it screen reading and magnification software xxii , a virtual keyboard xxiii , and other features such as a data entry application xxiv designed for those who cannot use conventional keyboards. Ubuntu has been adapted by many NGOs, companies, and individuals for specific disabilities in projects such as F123.org/Motor xxv , F123.org/Visual xxvi , LinuxAcessivel.org xxvii , Tiflobuntu.org xxviii , and Vinux xxix . Many of the assistive technologies such as the Dasher xxx data entry system and the eSpeak xxxi speech synthesizer, have been adapted for use in numerous other platforms including cellular phones xxxii and closed or proprietary operating systems. For example, users of Microsoft Windows have access to free and open source solutions such as Dasher, NVDA xxxiii , PVoice xxxiv , and the Virtual Magnifying Glass xxxv . In this regard, technologies such as eSpeak xxxvi (the speech synthesizer) and OCRopus xxxvii (the optical character recognition engine) are especially valuable to society as open source tools since they are basic building blocks used in a variety of screen readers and other solutions in multiple operating systems and platforms. The versatility of the open source model also facilitates localization, i.e. the translation of software interfaces and adaptation of features to local cultural and linguistic conventions. The closed source or proprietary equivalents of eSpeak, the speech synthesis software, lack the variety of languages xxxviii eSpeak provides. As a result languages that would not be viable through conventional proprietary models are available under FOSS. This is partly due to the ease in attracting donations of money and time by experts and others to projects they know will benefit everyone. This is in fact, a phenomenon observed not just in software development, but in content creation where initiatives such as Wikipedia are far more vibrant and popular than their proprietary counterparts. Distribution channels, technical support, and training Open source assistive technologies are available for free download or, in the case of most open source operating systems, are already included and need only be activated. Alternatively, some solutions can be purchased pre-configured and ready to run in DVD, CD-ROM, or USB Flash drives. Some FOSS assistive technologies are designed with portability in mind, so they are installed on CD- ROM disks or USB Flash drives for use on computers without the need to actually install any software on the computer itself. The NVDA xxxix screen reader can be run from USB Flash drives while some derivatives of Ubuntu such as F123.org/Visual xl can be installed entirely on USB drives and can be run even on a PC without an internal hard disk. Support contracts are typically available from the same companies xli that support the development and distribution of FOSS assistive technologies. Training is provided xlii by the same types of disability- related xliii NGOs xliv , small companies, educational institutions xlv , and independent consultants that provide training on proprietary assistive technologies. Strategic Implications of Choosing Open Source Assistive Technologies Ease of localization and low cost are the most widely mentioned reasons for choosing open source software solutions but they are not the most important ones. While the viability of localization for languages that are not very profitable would indeed be very difficult to replicate in closed source models, the cost of proprietary solutions can be made irrelevant in the short term through donations or substantial discounts. In this regard two important considerations come to mind: First, donations of proprietary assistive technology software are never made in a large enough volume to actually reach a large portion of the population that needs the technology; and second, governments, foundations, and NGOs need assurance that an investment made in training today will still be relevant in a decade or two and only open source models ensure that. The cooperative and decentralized nature of FOSS development ensures that even if a specific company no longer offers development, customization, or training services, plenty of others will. One of the best examples of this risk xlvi is exemplified by the now defunct Syntha-Voice Computers Inc. The company made Slimware window Bridge, a leading screen reader for Microsoft Windows which was the first of its kind. When the company closed in early 2002, just a couple of months after its founder died, all the investments made in training and licenses by individuals, NGOs, as well as government agencies in the United States and Canada effectively evaporated. In comparison, development and support of projects such as Orca and NVDA are distributed both geographically and across organizations so that the continuation of such projects is not vulnerable to any single point of failure. Having said that, it is important to ensure that the open source assistive technologies selected be widely respected and supported. For every project mentioned in this article there are dozens that did not attract a critical mass of users and developers and failed to become self-sustaining as clearly as many of their closed source counterparts. Conclusion While the open source development and distribution strategy is still poorly understood by the general public, the resiliency and viability of the FOSS model in even the most challenging economic circumstances make it a credible alternative in the portfolio of options available to the policymaker. As is the case with proprietary software, the selection of open source solutions is best done taking into account how many governments, companies, foundations, and individuals are supporters and users of the technology. Finally, the decentralized nature of successful open source assistive technologies remain their most