The Myth Of Open Source

[networker 0]

People go on about the benefit of open source software, which is great when you can use php for free and it doesn't cost you any money etc.What about the other side of the coin though? The open source mentality has appeared to kill moreopportunity than it's created. Take this message board as an example. Many web sites are poweredby free forums and message boards, and they are all for free. Is this really good?By doing this, programmers and coders become dime a dozen nobodies, and companies such as google can just walk in and clean up the rest. Can you imagine such a thing happening in the construction field? Can you imagine if all plumbers declared themselves open source and offered their services for free? It would kill the construction industry.Such an attitude would kill any industry.All very fine isn't it? Many,many people who learned programming in college are nowstuck with a skill that in many cases is basically worthless. That combined with the easy ability to just copy software, and the lack of proper copyright protectionadds up to something that just isn't very good at all.Now the way things are, everybody and his nineteen cousins are now 'software developers'.Probably more so than even house painters.Software is no longer a very enlightening field to say the least.

[Baniboy 3]

I agree. I would want to make money off my work if I had worked hard on it and it was worth the money.But open-source developers usually work in teams and they volunteer for it. And besides, having open-source stuff I think encourages software developers who want money for their work to invent new things and to be better than the free alternatives as well as lower their prices. But companies like adobe haven't obviously learned it price-wise. It would be nice if PhotoShop would cost less than 300 $. Less people would download pirated copies and they would make a profit.

Edited January 6, 2010 by Baniboy (see edit history)

[rvalkass 5]

By doing this, programmers and coders become dime a dozen nobodies, and companies such as google can just walk in and clean up the rest.

Invision still have a team of paid programmers, as do vBulletin. There are free platforms to run social networking sites, yet Facespace and Mybook and whatever they're called still employ plenty of programmers. The key is that programmers are often paid to write specialised software for a company - something they can't get anywhere else and no-one else has a need for. There will always be a demand for that, and one that free software distributed online would never fill - why write software that may only be relevant to a dozen people when you could write software that's useful to hundreds or thousands? Paid programmers also have fixed deadlines, a fixed scope and can work full-time, whereas those volunteering on open-source project are often just working in spare time at the evenings and weekends, and work on whatever interests them.

Can you imagine such a thing happening in the construction field? Can you imagine if all plumbers declared themselves open source and offered their services for free? It would kill the construction industry.Such an attitude would kill any industry.

Most people I know do their own DIY. It hasn't killed the construction industry. Some of the more complex stuff I just don't have the skills or knowledge for, so I get a plumber/electrician/carpenter/whoever in to do it. It doesn't kill the industry at all.

[truefusion 3]

Open-source programs do not own the market (yet), nor do they inherently contain bad code. While it may be the case that open-source projects allow for people to submit their own patches from a random developer (whether they are a noob programmer or experienced), the patches are not automatically accepted but are only considered by a select few (if at all more than one) and verified before applied to the actual source code. For who would want to accept anything they are given? But popular projects often require more than noobish programmers, as they are often significantly sized projects where many noobies wouldn't even bother getting their hands dirty with.The analogy you give concerning applying the open-source philosophy to more physical occupations doesn't follow from what you previously said. You were talking about being free and a lot of nooby workers. A lot of those jobs require certification. Nevertheless, concerning construction and plumbing, they don't have to have an open-source mentality to be unqualified or offer their services for free. The very house you live in could have been built with bad standards, and you won't figure it out until it starts crumbling on you, which you will continue paying for.Open-source doesn't apply to the workers but the work itself. Open-source means you get to do whatever you want with the work, whether you pay for the work or not. Remember, the word "free" when it comes to open source doesn't have to do anything with money. Many open-source and open-source compatible licenses allow you to charge for the work. Some go even further and allow you to later make your work closed-source. The work is there if you want to use it; it is not mandatory to use.As for the opportunities it leaves open, since open-source normally deals with software, we don't have to look any further than web hosts. You say it ruins opportunities, but web hosts, and web development, use many open-source programs and has opened up many possibilities. If you are running a business, be glad that you can start one without having to dish out so much money just to get it started in the first place, by going with popular open-source projects.

[Quatrux 4]

There are plenty IT projects / software in every country which cost millions and open source will never make those projects disappear, you can't use open source in a bank, unless minor software which doesn't cost over 4000$ and etc. There are plenty places like Hospitals which are using special software for which you'll never find a crack and etc. and which cost a lot of money.Open source is good for us, as paid software needs to be better than open source and developers/companies work on that to be better than free software, I mainly use only free software and it suits my needs, as I'm just a home user at home and need to use paid a software in a place I work as it's being under support, it's being updated and etc.For example: MySQL is free, but in fact it sucks, but it's free and it suits most of the needs as a simple database user needs, but for really big projects Microsoft SQL Server and etc. software needed for the Databases are much better and it costs money, there are cheaper alternatives as Oracle which is also better than MySQL for different reasons, but it's made with Java which makes it cheaper than Microsoft products.. This is just an example..When I can choose Open Source I choose it if it suits my needs, I can't imagine I would need to buy every software to view images, to connect to FTP, to browse the Internet as everybody needs it and lets say I am a company and I compete with another company by one product, but I know that that other company makes some income from an ftp server software, I may invest several millions to open source developers to create an open source ftp server which is better for me and may one day pay off.Another example is that always Paid Games on Windows will be much better than Free Games.. They are made by developers/programmers and etc. who everyday spend their time working on it as it's their job and they get money, where most of open source games are done on free time and I doubt that they ever could compete as it's not so organized. Some times older games become open source like quake for example, which has been ported to many different platforms.And besides Open source has profit and benefit, they are sponsored by rich companies, they get donations, there are a lot of bounties to finish a project and of course there are awards and prizes.And if one guy wishes to always get benefit from programming these days by creating some kind of a software, it's not 1990, it's 2010 and the only really good benefit can be by working in an organized group or company. Most of those one guy programs aren't as good and can't compete, but of course there are such programs which are good and made by one programmer, but it's usually for home users and some companies might be interested in them as it's cheap, but as I said for a person at home 300-3000$ (Photoshop?) might be a lot for a software, but for a simple company it's just cents when you think about it, especially as the company knows that it will bring profit.?

Edited January 7, 2010 by Quatrux (see edit history)

[buxgoddess 1]

Open source does not mean that the software or the product dealing with will be freely available to all and without any restrictions. The concept of being open source is to let other have access to the codes and prepare and develop something on top of that and make that public as well. However the concept can be copied and a separate program and project can be developed with some modification ofcourse and then utilize that for your own purpose.The cooperation between the various programmers leads to a better program but the whole output may not be as organized as the purchased products. This is a view that needs no explanation as it is just a matter of choice whether you prefer a customized product or a generic product customized by self.

[mahesh2k 0]

The open source mentality has appeared to kill more opportunity than it's created.

I have to agree. I use and support free software and open source to some extent. But it is really killing many services and business in my opinion. People who are end users lost the respect for software developers who are working hard for those open-source or free software. Many users (noobs) complaint about some software as if they have birth-right to complaint against it. I have seen many such users who have no respect for what they get it for free. And this is also killing the software market in my opinion, how much people can earn from tech support or enhancement of free/open source software ? How many such business are earning to keep up with their brand ? Free software after some extent kills the economy while open source increases chances of getting scraper competition. (Means some people will add 0 to open source code and distribute or sell it under their own brand). These problems are there in commercial software market as well but atleast commercial softwares are earning some money to support developers.

Only good thing about open source/free software is that it is killing spyware/adware based market. People are not opting for softwares which are ad-driven as they are getting open source or free software.

[knoppixusr 0]

Software development is definitely not a dying field, If anything open source has changed it positively by forcing programmers to come up with more innovative and creative software. Thus making for better products for everyone all around. As long as there remains progress with new technology, programmers will always be needed, the greater need for them might just shift from one area to the next.I also think you can attribute the very open source existence, on the mostly greedy software corporations that overcharge and under deliver and using dirty tactics to try and force clients to stay with them. People see this, hate it and rebel against it. Open Source has definitely opened more doors than it closed, now and for the long run.May the source be with you!

[networker 0]

Software development is definitely not a dying field, If anything open source has changed it positively by forcing programmers to come up with more innovative and creative software.

I can appreciate the fact that people say there are certain benefits of open source software, and these can't be denied. The thing is where are these innovative and creative software programs that are breaking through?
I know that somebody will come up with a list, but all I can say is that it's probable that this list will still be much too small to show a real ratio of productivity when one thinks of the great number of skilled,
semi-skilled programmers out there and the small tiny rewards over all.

I know Mozzilla will be included in this list. We've all built browsers before. I never really saw the brilliance of Mozilla anyway. I think they just got lucky. Who wants to know about garbage collection anyway?

This widely accepted innovative software will be nothing but a drop in the ocean though. Half the reason being no doubt, that the public generally just won't give fresh ideas by cutting edge small time programmers a chance.

I made several applications that were indeed cutting edge. All that happened to them was that they became a tiny,tiny needle in the gigantic haystack plethora of free software directories that are out there.
Rarely seen, rarely used.
The same public wants to gladly suffer the extremely bloated,over priced Adobe flash.
Where is the alternative to that? Where are these cutting edge software programmers when
you need them?

[k_nitin_r 8]

Hi!Open-source software has not killed the industry at all. In fact, it has enabled independent software developers to customize and provide software for firms. It has enabled individual software developers and organizations to reduce the time that they require to build a software system. In fact, one can build a blog in less than a week due to the availability of blog engines and plugins. Does open-source software reduce the opportunities for employment? Quite the contrary, in fact. I believe the widespread use and availability of open-source software has created new opportunities for software developers and designers to put their skills to use.Another key aspect of open-source development is that software developers get feedback on their source code and this serves as valuable feedback for them to improve. This can be in the form of bug reports, software patches, or simply emails or messages to the source code author.For the end-user, open-source software also means lower costs. Instead of having to pay for a complete system to meet his or her requirements, he or she simply has to pay for customization or plugins to be developed on a common platform.

[kleong 0]

Instead of killing the industry, the presence of open-source spice things up. Every software company will be force to enhance and improve their products lest they get "outgunned" by the open-source. With lesser bugs and more feature-rich program, who are the ones who benefits? Us, end-users.

[knoppixusr 0]

I can appreciate the fact that people say there are certain benefits of open source software, and these can't be denied. The thing is where are these innovative and creative software programs that are breaking through?

I know that somebody will come up with a list, but all I can say is that it's probable that this list will still be much too small to show a real ratio of productivity when one thinks of the great number of skilled,

semi-skilled programmers out there and the small tiny rewards over all.

 

I know Mozzilla will be included in this list. We've all built browsers before. I never really saw the brilliance of Mozilla anyway. I think they just got lucky. Who wants to know about garbage collection anyway?

 

This widely accepted innovative software will be nothing but a drop in the ocean though. Half the reason being no doubt, that the public generally just won't give fresh ideas by cutting edge small time programmers a chance.

 

I made several applications that were indeed cutting edge. All that happened to them was that they became a tiny,tiny needle in the gigantic haystack plethora of free software directories that are out there.

Rarely seen, rarely used.

The same public wants to gladly suffer the extremely bloated,over priced Adobe flash.

Where is the alternative to that? Where are these cutting edge software programmers when

you need them?

I think you need to be honest with us here and tell us, Why, oh why you consider you applications to be so cutting edge?

And even if they are cutting edge, this does not necessarily, automatically turn into sales and profits. There are other factors too.

You think corporations like Adobe and Microsoft made money without marketing their products and casting a little voodoo spell over it?

 

Maybe, I am wrong to say this, it might even sound harsh... but to me it really seems like you are blaming your own failures and shortcomings on open source.

I can understand that you are angry, after spending loads of time and resources and in the end it didn't work. But staying angry and bitter won't help you the least.

 

How do you learn from mistakes if you don't own up to them in the first place?

 

I honestly wish you all the best.

 

Oh and here is my list:

GIMP

Sun Virtual Box

Audacity

Apache / PHP / mysql

SMB server, Openvpn, ssh

wine, dosbox

Open Office

Mozilla Firefox + No script

Mozilla Thunderbird

Clamav

Pidgin

Operating sytems (your pick)

[networker 0]

Maybe, I am wrong to say this, it might even sound harsh... but to me it really seems like you are blaming your own failures and shortcomings on open source.

Who the #&^&^&% are you? Yes you are wrong. Here on Xisto we are encouraged to create discusssion

for discusssions sake, not to get harsh with people. I wasn't blaming anybody.

Besides that you're list is weak. I mean Sun micro systems open office, definitely a small operation from some cutting edge programmers? Give me a break. Your paltry list covers a lot of years.

 

As I said, take a look at the list of thousands and thousands of free and cheap software directories.

Almost all of this software is high quality and UNUSED. Don't blame me, blame the market. Basic laws of

economics, basic laws of supply and demand at work.

[webishqiptar 0]

Being open source does not mean, it does not bring earnings. If you see wordpress website, it is full of affiliate links to wordpress hosts. I think they might get a fortune from affiliates. I have the same opinion on phpbb forum. You always see ads and affiliate links at their official website. So being opensource brings lots of money too. Plus there are hundreds of people who try to give ideas about problems and upgrades at open source projects.

[networker 0]

Being open source does not mean, it does not bring earnings. If you see wordpress website, it is full of affiliate links to wordpress hosts. I think they might get a fortune from affiliates. I have the same opinion on phpbb forum. You always see ads and affiliate links at their official website. So being opensource brings lots of money too. Plus there are hundreds of people who try to give ideas about problems and upgrades at open source projects.

Absolutely. My only wish really is that open source software wasn't quite as open as it has been.
The way things could of been is something akin to, if a website wanted to use say a messageboard
for free fine, but as soon as a site becomes profit making, then a certain percentage of it's profits
to a certain extent should go to the creators of the free software they are using. I think that's a nice
compromise.
Edited January 8, 2010 by networker (see edit history)