GOD

The sun glows red as it sinks on the waves,
Smiles all round as we watch in awe,
With fiery eyes,and hands held apart,
Till the waves have their fill,
And moonlight falls.


As it sets on the waves,
so it peeks out the hills,
Though far far away,
Never too far for Nature's cause.


The earth is but a speck,
On an ever spreading ether,
But to man its mother,
And all else is nether.


Morning dew and twilight,
Are but carefree arts of Nature,
While the earth and the sun,
Are Natures' pyramids.


Pure Natures' Beauty,
Fill both eyes and heart,
And as we smell a rose,
Or watch the sky touch our nose,
We know we are all part,
Of Mother Natures' chart.


So as we pray within our hearts,
We feel at one with Natures' bliss,
And all at once we see the light,
Feeling her warm and soothing kiss.

Seamless

Exotic colours, Vibrant movements,
Evergreen moments, Lasting peace,
Engulfed within a mound of warmth,
Giving guidance to bring no harm.


Ah! What a beautiful day,
With sun shining bright,
We feel the air of freshness,
Even as our eyes are held tight.


Sad thoughts are but a blur,
Happiness lingers forever,
If we do have a vision,
And keep the conscience clear.


The earth is so big,
But with ends defined,
Visions and thoughts are of a ceaseless kind,
Engulfed in the limits of our mind.


The power of the mind,
And the will of the soul,
Is what makes a man,
And gets him to his goal.

Open ya Closed

Adam was created. He eats an apple, a forbidden fruit and so came Eve .Or is it—Adam was created and so was Eve , they ate apples and then came their child—Or better still—GOD ate an apple and so came man!! (BTW was it an apple?).Whatever it is the ages have rocketed past and we stand here with 6 billion others in a world so full of contrasts. Statisticians say that you have seven people looking like you and I ask,”Why seven? Why not six?”, and I set out to prove them wrong. I do my own analysis and end up agreeing, but by then their figure comes to five. The mind ponders questions, accepts rejects, evaluates itself and so the list goes. But in the end no two minds think the same. So you might think this is all nonsensical, but for others it might be enlightenment. Didn’t I say the world is full of contrasts?

When there is white there is black, a hero seeks a villain, land meets the sea, and so is open source to closed source. Or is it? Most people have always tended to cherish and preserve their achievements, and so came patents and doctrines and laws and such. Why is it so? Primary reason is recognition, and then comes security. So it came to be that all technological inventions and innovations were recorded patented and their creators properly rewarded. So far; so good. Then IT boomed, as did the mind. But all boon(m)s come with a bane. Money poured, followed by greed for it. But then with growing bane boon had to come again, and so came open source. Started as a noble venture it has grown into one of the most productive chapters in IT history. People are free to tinker and benefit from it. It bars any kind of restriction and endorses free usage and alterations. And the mind wandered. People were amazed at its growth. Tremendous interest loomed. Ideas poured and thus we have the Gaim’s and the gcc’s in place of Yahoo’s and tcc’s. Closed source is still at large, its success ensured by human mentality. So which is better? Of course the one which stands time will be the eventual winner.

In the present situation people have their own different ideas concerning this issue.The essence of open software is free distribution of software along with code and having no restrictions imposed, all this being done recursively in all directions. Staunch supporters of the open source regime claim burgeoning costs as their primary reason. Freedom to modify, opportunity to enjoy coding and improve interest, confluence of ideas, better productivity—what can be more promising? And so it is that the backing for open software has grown. It is even more predominant in developing nations like ours where cost is a major player and talent is vast. The advent of internet has worked to their advantage with open software being freely available for download. One of their major concerns has been the coordination and standardization of such software so that no one takes undue advantage and no harm in any sort is caused. Even this has been coming together well with the emergence of forums and websites related to development of open software. So this presents the left end of the spectrum. Moving right we have the proprietary people vouching for closed code and proprietary software. Though there is a subtle difference between proprietary and closed source the central idea without financial details is the same i.e. do not release the code for further modification. This being the system in use by the bigwigs of the industry has more financial backing, greater level of detail and to large extent better software, though all this comes at a price. Their potency, according to them lies in the strength of the industry and in providing the layman user with lucid software leaving out the technicalities, with or without a cost. Some of them even criticize the open software ideals arguing that it does not value human effort and such projects go unorganized and are too crude for the layman. But time has proved that it is not so. More and more people are using open software and their efforts are going in a positive direction with Linux as a major backend. Then why not do away with closed source? The simplest answer would be ‘competition’ and ‘capitalism’. With so many firms in the fight for market share there has to be secrecy with the code and production details. So closed source is definitely here to stay.

Everything has a saturation point. We live in a world of moderates, even when there is an extreme there is a counter to it. It is because the earth is neither too far nor near that we have life. So the spectrum of technology has to shrink and it is doing so to some level. IBM endorses open source, Windows is learning from Linux, and open source is here because of closed source. So it is not a question of who beats who—it is rather a case of choice based on circumstances. So rather than fight like monkeys, we’d better think like one and we would have a calmer world and less obscene discussions. So lessen the contrast (what!!), increase the colour and sharpness in life, wouldn’t it be a better picture we’d have? (Hell yeah I did buy a new TV)

___________________