Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Commercial Open-Source Software

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the stuff-to-read dept.

Paul Johnson writes "I've written an essay on where I think the OSS movement should go. I think it needs to commercialise itself, but on its own terms not on the terms of the conventional closed-source software industry. This essay looks at the pros and cons of both the closed and open source worlds, and then outlines a synthesis of both which I hope will have the advantages of both. "

1 of 187 comments (clear)

  1. A good essay however... by kovacsp · · Score: 5

    I'm not sure what people's obsession is with outlining the "future of open source". I was tempted to do it at one point myself, because I'm interested in the economics of it all myself. And then I started working on my very own open source project, as well as contributing to a few others.

    As a result of these experiences I've come to the conclusion that I was thinking about it all wrong. The current way of doing things has already evolved into a highly efficient means of production. Things that need to be done get done. Things that aren't important fall by the wayside. (As an aside, this is why Gates' comment about no roadmap is totally irrelevant. By not having a roadmap, we are ultimately free to do whatever needs to be done, and we aren't overcommitting ourselves to a project that nobody wants). There's no need to change the way people write software, things will happen on their own, after all that's the beauty of a market economy, is it not?

    Lots of people have said something in these forums. The real economy in OSS development is the economy of time and talent. The projects that are the most interesting, or are needed the most (etc.) are the ones who will receive the most developer time. There is alot more to this, and I'm sure it'll make a good masters thesis for somebody, but to really understand open source software you have to shed all your preconceptions and intuitions about commercial software. The two are fundamentally at odds with eachother.

    Commercial development corps generally see software as a product, something which can be sold for money. Open source developers see software as a tool. A tool which they can use in their lives. Of course, I'm just speaking in vague generalities here, but in general this is the case. (Case in point: how many developers of OSS applications are writing the package for money? none that I know of.)