What do you think open source software is missing?

Ranguvar · 2009-12-02 12:22:55

ngoonee wrote:

I believe the topic is "open source', not 'free' software (free as in freedom, not as in beer).

Most people use them to mean the same thing. If anything, Free Software is a better definition (open source? fine, my code is open, but you don't have license to do jack with it besides read it, is that 'open'?), but I don't think there's much of a difference in how they're being used.

ngoonee wrote:

And I believe the whole point of a capitalistic system is that you get paid what you're worth.

The capitalist system has flaws?

fsckd · 2009-12-02 14:41:49

FSF thinks they are different, but agree with Ranguvar on his other points.

ngoonee · 2009-12-02 14:43:43

Ranguvar wrote:

ngoonee wrote:
I believe the topic is "open source', not 'free' software (free as in freedom, not as in beer).
Most people use them to mean the same thing. If anything, Free Software is a better definition (open source? fine, my code is open, but you don't have license to do jack with it besides read it, is that 'open'?), but I don't think there's much of a difference in how they're being used.

Most people are confused, as well =p. If the important part was freedom I'd go for pirated software that I'm familiar with rather than re-learning the way I approach computers. And that's what many do, due to the misunderstanding that "OSS is just a free alternative". Its about community, collaboration, a transparency in the process of development.

I guess I just disagree that "Open Source" must mean "I don't have to pay for it". Its an ethical issue rather than a legal one, because obviously if you can see the source code you can compile it and use it gratis. And if a doctor decides to hack the kernel in his spare time, fair play to him. Very different from a coder who spends most of his waking time working on a big project. Just because he believes that software should be free (as in freedom) doesn't mean he doesn't need to eat/pay bills/send kids to college.

Ranguvar wrote:

ngoonee wrote:
And I believe the whole point of a capitalistic system is that you get paid what you're worth.
The capitalist system has flaws?

Yep, and this is one of them . Its not even unique to Open Source software, the same mentality prevails in my country with religious ministers, with some people having the idea that "they're doing it for a GOOD CAUSE, of COURSE they're willing to sacrifice the money". That is probably true, as with in Open Source, but its not Right (tm).

karol · 2009-12-02 16:39:50

@ pillz
I've read that Slackware and Ardour are examples of community supporting people who deliver the things the community needs. Yeah, two examples ...

As for hardware support, this may be tough. Let's say I've got a company churning some nice chips. Why should I support anything else that an OS w/ 90% market share? Supporting a couple other OSen could outweight the additional benefits of having more customers and being flexible, having more partners.

ngoonee · 2009-12-02 23:45:48

karol wrote:

@ pillz
I've read that Slackware and Ardour are examples of community supporting people who deliver the things the community needs. Yeah, two examples ...

As I mentioned, Ardour is the 'shining light' in this area, but the amounts mentioned are simply ridiculous for the quality of product, don't you think? Perhaps some US Arch-ers could update us on what a fair salary for a relatively top-notch programmer (a white-collar job!) would be.

As for hardware support, this may be tough. Let's say I've got a company churning some nice chips. Why should I support anything else that an OS w/ 90% market share? Supporting a couple other OSen could outweight the additional benefits of having more customers and being flexible, having more partners.

Honestly, I'd prefer companies to open hardware specs rather than release drivers. Even nvidia, whose binaries I have high respect for, are constrained by the way they implement things, and always a bit behind the curve with regards to features (xrandr 1.2 anyone? Don't even mention 1.3...), or reimplementing features instead of using what's available (TwinView).

Of course, secrecy in design is part of the philosophy of hardware companies, though I do think it would be possible to release 'just enough' to write drivers but not to give out hints to the competition? Idle speculation.

shock · 2009-12-05 10:07:47

Most of the things are there and more will be developed soon. I just expect big vendors to come and develop for this platform.

karol · 2009-12-05 13:04:58

> Most of the things are there and more will be developed soon.
> I just expect big vendors to come and develop for this platform.
Will they release their products as open source?

Trent · 2009-12-06 01:29:56

shock wrote:

Most of the things are there and more will be developed soon. I just expect big vendors to come and develop for this platform.

What platform?

techprophet · 2009-12-06 02:35:15

Good drivers for multimedia keys on my keyboard. I've tried every trick in the book and a few of my own attempting to make it work, but to no avail.

Trent wrote:

shock wrote:
Most of the things are there and more will be developed soon. I just expect big vendors to come and develop for this platform.
What platform?

Very true. A unified platform would create a whole lot more profitability. Not having to support a gazillion different distros....bleh it's bad enough as it is trying to provide support for a FOSS project.

Last edited by techprophet (2009-12-06 02:38:18)

karol · 2009-12-06 02:52:22

> Very true. A unified platform would create a whole lot more profitability.
GNU / Linux = freedom to fork.

Not having gazillions of different hardware combinations would also help.

shock · 2009-12-07 09:20:49

>"Will they release their products as open source?"

I don't know. Adobe already started with open source products. maybe others will follow their steps and find way to make money.

Arch Linux

#51 2009-12-02 12:22:55

Re: What do you think open source software is missing?

#52 2009-12-02 14:41:49

Re: What do you think open source software is missing?

#53 2009-12-02 14:43:43

Re: What do you think open source software is missing?

#54 2009-12-02 16:39:50

Re: What do you think open source software is missing?

#55 2009-12-02 23:45:48

Re: What do you think open source software is missing?

#56 2009-12-05 10:07:47

Re: What do you think open source software is missing?

#57 2009-12-05 13:04:58

Re: What do you think open source software is missing?

#58 2009-12-06 01:29:56

Re: What do you think open source software is missing?

#59 2009-12-06 02:35:15

Re: What do you think open source software is missing?

#60 2009-12-06 02:52:22

Re: What do you think open source software is missing?

#61 2009-12-07 09:20:49

Re: What do you think open source software is missing?

Board footer