Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 21st Jul 2012 23:06 UTC
Permalink for comment 527740
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:30 UTC, submitted by JRepin
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 22:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 15:53 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 22:43 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 21:50 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-11-13
This is a good point, as it is likely that Sparrow would never have existed as an open source app, because you're not going to make money like that by selling support services, or coffee mugs. And hey, not everybody wants to work for free.
And anyway, I recently read that an open source email app (Thunderbird) has had its development stopped recently, except for bug fixes and security updates. Will anybody fork it and continue working on it? Who knows. But really, how many open source projects have died on the vine because the developer got bored with it, or didn't have the time to work on it anymore.
The point is that whether you're using open or closed source apps, there's really no guarantees one way or the other, unless you personally plan to work on an open source app if it gets abandoned. Personally, I'd rather use an app where the developer gets paid for it, because then you know his livelihood depends on the continued development of the app, vs 'I just had a kid so I don't have time to work on this in the evenings anymore.' Sure, he may get bought out and the app killed, but like I said, there are really no guarantees one way or the other.