Rapid Internet Growth In Iran 315
securitas writes "The BBC's Abbas Azimi reports on the rapid growth of the Internet and Internet cafes in Iran, apparently with the tacit approval of the government. Seven million Iranians have Internet access, or 10% of the population - double the rate two years ago. Access costs 60 cents/hour. The article describes how the Internet is used for everything from VoIP phone calls to chat and Web logs. Even Iran's vice-president has a daily blog on a popular site with 'musings about politics and life.' All of this despite the ban on many sites, which is easily circumvented by Iran's webmasters and geeks. An interesting point is that most of the PCs used in Iran are assembled from smuggled parts and run pirated versions of all the latest software (due to foreign embargo?). It sounds like a great opportunity for open source software."
Why would... (Score:2, Informative)
Love in Iran!! (Score:5, Informative)
" Meeting girls is easy this way," said Amir, as he continued typing, "You can be relaxed no worries."
Apparrently Iranians need the love too! Just like Internet access first got booming over here, it seems porn and interent romance will probably be a big thing over there too.
Re:Why would... (Score:4, Informative)
pirated software (Score:4, Informative)
the pirated software is not Iran-specific, this occurs in many parts of the world, most notably India, China, and other Asian countries, in some parts of china you can go to your local computer store and pick up a copied version various software
Smuggled is a strong word (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Why would... (Score:1, Informative)
linuxiran.org (Score:5, Informative)
Don't blame the embargo... (Score:4, Informative)
Pirated Software isn't a problem only in Iran. So don't blame it on embargo. The problem is economic. To buy MS Windows and Office is some time more expensive than buy a computer in the country where i live (and computers are already expensive without it.). People buy software for bussiness, but don't remember a friend of mine buying MS off-the-shelf software for personal use.
It's easier to sell a computer with a pirated Windows because it's cheaper and some people don't know linux yet, and prefer to buy a computer like their neighbor one.
Re:Love in Iran!! (Score:2, Informative)
But your insight on porn at least holds true w/ my old roomate ^^
MS even supports kazakh( ever even heard of it ?) (Score:4, Informative)
Even now MS even offers input language support for Kazakh, Estonian, Kyrgyz [microsoft.com] so farsi shoudnt be too difficult. Though of course I cant believe anyone cares abt that enough to use MS.
Re:Actually it should be lower (Score:2, Informative)
and windows 2000 sort of said it did but it didnt seem to work very well unless you installed office xp. windows xp and office xp combo was perfect as farsi seemed to run natively.
only problem with xp was if the main input method was english and a user who used farsi was using the system when the screen lockout thing would kick in you would never ever be able to unlock it with the right passwd as you would need the right input method which isnt an option at the screen unlock!
as for linux or OSS linuxiran have live CD based knopper's distro called shabdiz(x) which has farsi kde and other tools.
weird logo.
i think the gnu free tools for windows and other bumper packs do get bought in iran
mandrake comes out of the box with farsi support. never tried it as opportunity hasnt come up to foist linux on any iranians.
and most linux supports arabic anyway which therefore can be easily adapted. i think there are a few how-tos out there for any langugae regarding linux for native language users and second language learners.
blogging in Iran (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Doesn't Really sound like a great place for OSS (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Doesn't Really sound like a great place for OSS (Score:5, Informative)
But surely you must know that Iran is not an Arab country?
Try obtaining the basic facts before you start berating others at great length! X-D
Re:Doesn't Really sound like a great place for OSS (Score:3, Informative)
Iran is a persian country, I totally agree.
But I didn't imply that Iran was a part of the Arab world. It's just a common misconception I didn't argue because it was not the proper subject of my post.
Furthermore, even if 60% of the population is persian, the arab culture, religion (even if Sunni are in minority in the arab world), and language still play an important role in the common life of this country.
And the last elections is a good proof of that.
Sorry if I didn't make that point clear.
Nonetheless it remains the same in the absolute.
Regards,
jdif
Compounding your error (Score:5, Informative)
First, you've confused shia and sunni.
Second, Persians speak Parsi/Farsi/Persian, however you want to call it -- not Arabic. Yes, it's been altered by Arab colonizers, but it's still Persian.
Finally, ask some Persians about where the high culture like art, architecture and poetry of the Arab Empire come from.
WHY NOT? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Doesn't Really sound like a great place for OSS (Score:5, Informative)
Re:You know, a thought [OT] (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Iranian revolutions (Score:3, Informative)
Buddy, have you only been reading history written by your good Uncle Sam?
Go back to 1953, when British and US intelligence agencies removed Mossadegh from power [wikipedia.org], only to give power to the capitalist-friendly Shah. Mossadegh had nationalized the oil industry after failing to negotiate higher royalties, and so had to go. Oh, and he was a nasty commie.
The Shah used torture, repressed and killed scores of communists and lefties, leaving all dissent to right-wing anti-American religious nuts. Remember the Iran hostage crisis [wikipedia.org]? That was the first modern Islamic fundamentalist revolution.
The US and Brits destabilized democracy, by taking away non-violent options for people's legitimate aspirations, they made violence all but inevitable. We reap what we sow. (Note: this is not to say I agree with violence, far from it).
So, with that little historical perspective, you can understand why I seriously doubt the administration would encourage a revolution because of the hardships the population faces: they have caused it to further their economic interests.
Now if you told me they wanted to destabilize them because of the fundies, well, that would be believable