Open source radicals--eat cake

TalkBack 38 of 99:

Next »

« Previous

• Thread View
• Flat View

Re: GPL Bad or Good for the Industry

>> Like most of the anti-GPL crowd, this person equates the computer industry as a whole with a very small segment of the industry.
First, all authoritative estimates I've seen show that less than 30% of professional software developers (possibly much less) are involved in the development of shrink-wrapped software. <<

It doesn?t matter. The continued advances in Windows, MS development systems, and other proprietary OSs and development tools, contribute a great deal to opportunities for custom software being developed. E.g. .Net has allowed Windows programmers to develop a broad range of software solutions they couldn?t do easily before. From web applications to web services; from GUI PC applications, to applications that run on Pocket PC and other embedded systems. .Net / web services allow you to make disparate systems work together; and it allows you to leverage your knowledge of Visual Studio .Net as you move from one kind of project to another, saving lots of time and training and other costs. I could go on and on, but the point is that advances in MS Windows and development tools have significantly expanded opportunities for programmers who do custom software development ? as well software companies that create add-ons for the platform.


>> The majority of us are involved in the development of custom software for our employers/clients that will never see widespread distribution. For us, OSS sometimes provides us with a basis that we can use to jumpstart our projects (and as long as the result is only used internally, the GPL does not require us to distribute our software if we choose not to, although it may be to our advantage to contribute back to the original developers), and the availability of good OSS tools means that our employers/clients have more money available for salaries, better hardware, or R&D of their core products than is the case when they are using expensive proprietary tools. <<

Yes. But for a very long time, add-ons / plug-ins / components / controls have existed in the proprietary world that allow developers to assemble software solutions much more quickly that can generally be done with OSS. All we need to do is look at the object models for the components and use / adapt / extend them the way we want to quickly. Very, very few developers feel the need to see the source code of these components. They simply want them to work as advertised. Plus compatibility issues can arise if you use components from vendors; change its source code; then try to use upgrades to the components. Life is a lot simpler to just use the component, and just adapt it in its binary form.

In general, just as it is with other software, OSS tools are less capable than their proprietary counterparts. Also, development tools contribute only a tiny amount to the cost of a development project. Forgoing much more capable proprietary development tools in order to save a few hundred bucks on OSS tools, will most likely lead to a project that costs appreciably more. There is no credible case that OSS tools save a client money in an overall project. The few hundred bucks it saves a client up front, will probably cost the client much more in overall cost further down the line.

>> As for the hardware/service companies, using OSS and contributing to its development does make sense in both the short and long term. Encouraging its use by their customers frees up the money that would be spent on proprietary software licenses for spending on better hardware and more services. Contributing to the development of OSS shares the cost of software development with other organizations, freeing up R&D funds for other purposes. <<

Just how much money do you think hardware companies are willing to spend on OSS which someone else can take advantage of? Only IBM does this, because in the overall scheme of things, it allows the company to sell an increased cross section of hardware. However, most other OEMs use Red Hat or some other popular distribution?s version of Linux. These hardware companies contribute very little to the development of Linux or other OSS. Hardware companies aren?t socialists. As much as they will tout the sharing model used in OSS development, they have little inclination to do the type and scale of investing proprietary companies do in their own software development.

>> Yes, locking customers into proprietary software that must be upgraded every two or three years, and which cannot be upgraded without hardware upgrades is good for the proprietary software companies and hardware makers in at least the short term, but it is bad for customers. And nothing that is bad for customers can be good for the industry in the long term. <<

In spite of the way you make it sound, it is the above model that made the PC industry grow so dynamically the way it did until the .com bust a few years ago. Have customers overall been at a loss for it? I don't think so. Do you prefer a model where most computers still use green screens and are not affordable to the masses. Do you prefer a model in which the Internet does not expand the way it has today, and opportunities for developers do not open up the way it has currently because of the mass adoption of PCs by businesses and consumers? Do not be so quick to put down the current proprietary PC industry model. Yes, it may have us on an upgrade treadmill. At the same time however, it advances the uses of computers, it makes us able to do more with computers than ever before, it allows for more people to gain access to computers, and it increases opportunities for those create custom software in our jobs.

Posted by: P. Douglas   Posted on: 03/02/04 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

• Building the Virtualized Enterprise with VMware Iinfrastructure VMware VMware virtualization software has been adopted by over 120,000 enterprise ... Download Now
• Why Isn't Server Virtualization Saving Us More? A Few Small Changes May Dramatically Increase Your Efficiency VMware Companies have rapidly adopted server virtualization over the past few ... Download Now
• The Impact of Virtualization Software on Operating Environments VMware Today's use of virtualization technology allows IT professionals to ... Download Now