Lessons Proprietary Software Can Teach Open Source

cdlu writes "Kris Shaffer at Newsforge argues that just because software is open source doesn't mean it should be unpopular. What lessons, he asks, can open source projects learn from popular proprietary software?" From the article: "In the absence of a monopoly, there are three traits that are likely to make an application popular: it is cool or attractive in some way, it provides easy entry, and it is addictive. Barring these things, most average users will stick with the status quo. In fact, many users never use a program on their computer that did not come pre-installed. However, by creating an attractive, easy to set up, addictive application, a developer can motivate the average user to break this barrier and try something new. And several such applications can generate strong popular interest in the open source movement in general."

Comments

Drug Analogy?

[ackthpt]

there are three traits that are likely to make an application popular: it is cool or attractive in some way, it provides easy entry, and it is addictive.

Ah. It makes sense now...

• MS Office Opium
• MS Office Morphine, to help you break your addiction to MS Office Opium
• MS Office Heroin, to help you break your addiction to MS Office Morphine

Clearly businesses do have alternatives, we just didn't know the code names.

next up: MS Office Crack, soon to be followed by Out-Of-Money and switching to Open Office to break the cycle.

Sounds more like video games, as they can be very addictive, but I don't ever recall lying awake at night, with the shakes, because it's been 36 hours since my last hit of Excel.

Easy entry, I'd assume means easy to access the application and use it, getting desired results with a minimum of fuss. I can't say this is exclusive to proprietary software, because some highly successful packages have very steep learning curves and can vary from version to version in ways which can be maddening. (I recently replaced a several step process for producing lists with a one-button application and the end-user was alarmed because the page count didn't match what they expected. Well, I added an extra item per page because I had space, guess I should have explained that one, eh? But it completely bypassed the need for Office Tools, which were a large source of frustration in a frequently run process.)

Reliability seems to be overrated, however, as I've seen any number of vendor packages blow up, and an IT manager simply say, "well let me know when you get it fixed" Even when it's a desktop app that several users may be using (and man, will they whine when they lose even a minutes work!)

Perhaps what proprietary software is best at is concealing easter eggs.

Re:Drug Analogy?

[TheViewFromTheGround]

Sounds more like video games, as they can be very addictive, but I don't ever recall lying awake at night, with the shakes, because it's been 36 hours since my last hit of Excel.

On the other hand, only software companies and drug dealers call their customers and clients users.

Too Funny

[airrage]

"..attractive in some way, it provides easy entry, and it is addictive."

Interesting turn of a phrase ...

Wow!

[Otter]

In the absence of a monopoly, there are three traits that are likely to make an application popular: it is cool or attractive in some way, it provides easy entry, and it is addictive.

Gee, with insight like that it's hard to imagine how the LNUX stock price could be down 99.8% from its peak!

Re:Boot from CD Porn distro

[doublem]

And suddenly, a Porn idea spawns defense and espionage related applications.

Re:Boot from CD Porn distro

[sootman]

"No traces left behind on the hard drive..."

The keyboard, however, is another matter entirely. :-)