Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

How to Misunderstand Open Source

Posted by timothy on from the in-light-of-recent-events dept.

Sam Hiser writes "This article intends to clear up some misconceptions about open source software development practices. It can help developers, IT and business managers transition from a closed development environment to an open one characterized by shorter time-to-market and lower costs. The author, Tom Adelstein -- an experienced CPA, code developer, project manager and consultant -- makes clear the notion that Open Source Software bears a mark of professionalism."

5 of 318 comments (clear)

  1. Open Source Is Communism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    n/t

  2. Open Source is bad for the economy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    Non commercial software = less profits for businesses = worse economy = worse for the people.

  3. I RTFAed.. by Channard · · Score: -1, Flamebait
    Didn't RTFA, did we?

    I did. So does my free puppy arrive by post, or do I have to compile it? I'd imagine that latter could be quite messy, so I'd better move my PC into the bathroom if that's the case.

  4. Re:Bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    Doesn't matter anyways. Open Source is a ripoff and RMS is a fucking retard!

  5. If you don't pay people to write code... by plinius · · Score: -1, Flamebait
    If you don't pay people to write code...then don't expect much.

    Just as:

    If you didn't pay a plumber to fix your toilet, you shouldn't expect a working toilet.

    Or if you don't pay someone to fix your car's radiator, their work may be shoddy, but you can only blame yourself.

    Open source has a lot of good justifications, but the argument that open source equals quality is just bogus.

    And Linux? It's only good because it copies 20 year old Unix technology to the letter. And who wrote Unix? PAID programmers. And is Unix really all that great? NO: monolithic kernels are OLD technology.