The ongoing egg-in-the-face of the PAP over the “tender” (thanks to Alex for posting it via an anonymous source) awarded to AIM over the acquisition of a piece of software created for the use of the Town Councils is really disappointing.
Looking at the Today Online story, it would seem that Mr Teo and Mr Das have a lot of explaining to do.
Here’s an example of how proprietary software companies abuse their customers. If you happen to have acquired a new laptop and it came with Windows 7 Starter Kit installed, when you set it up, you will be presented with a set of terms and conditions. Most people will just click OK and accept the terms and conditions without reading a word. But in this case, if you did not read anything you’d have missed out a juicy bit of restriction.
Section 8 on Page 7 of the Software License Terms says:
8. SCOPE OF LICENSE. The software is licensed, not sold. This agreement only gives you some rights to use the features included in the software edition you licensed. The manufacturer or installer and Microsoft reserve all other rights. Unless applicable law gives you more rights despite this limitation, you may use the software only as expressly permitted in this agreement. In doing so, you must
comply with any technical limitations in the software that only allow you to use it in certain ways. You may not
· work around any technical limitations in the software;
· customize the desktop background;
· …;
Isn’t amazing that even though you thought you bought that piece of software (according to their rules, it is not sold only licensed), you are NOT allowed to change the desktop background. Changing it will be breaking the terms and conditions of Windows 7 Starter Kit. Wow.
It sure sounds like our friends at the PAP-run Town Councils and AIM took a chunks out of the proprietary software “let’s screw and milk the customer” book. Only this time, the customer is the tax-paying Singapore public.
My offer to the Town Councils, expecially Aljunied Hougang Town Council, to help them build a fully open source solution remains.
The system must be as transparent as it claims to be. The parties involved must make full declarations to the public in a responsible, accountable way
What I am concerned is that the rot is probably very deep. If something like this which would never have come up if not for the fiasco, I suspect there are probably many more schemes concocted over the years. The various stories we have heard about arms shipments to Burma/Myanmar via Singapore (and Singapore owned companies) would probably surface when certainly players disappear from the scene.