Linked by Eugenia Loli on Tue 12th Apr 2005 16:15 UTC
Editorial Being the best doesn't always mean being the most popular. We all know of many inferior products that are immensely, sometimes perplexingly, popular. However, this does not mean that one must forsake the pursuit of excellence when pursuing a broad market share. As proponents of open source software, it should not be beneath us to pursue popularity or to look to proprietary developers as examples. And by following the right examples, we can help spread the usage of open source software without sacrificing the goal of software excellence, says NewsForge.
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: That is the point
by openartist on Wed 13th Apr 2005 08:33 UTC

"One more thing, fuck companies that want to put their proprietary apps on linux. GPL (this includes linux kernel) was started for freedom and openness. Why are all these people coming to linux now and want to change this? If you like closed commercial apps then stay with Windows. It really pisses me off when I hear Free Software/Open Source extremist from people that have been using linux for 1-2 years. Again if you don't believe in gpl then don't use it, but the linux kernel is one of them."

That is part of my point and highlights the problem. What I'm saying is the whole "if they don't like it they can shove it" attitude has got to go. Open Source belongs to everyone and no one, it's indiscriminate of how long you've used it and how you use it(as a power user or a "newbie"). This isn't just about the GPL it's about the attitudes we hold. Nobody owns Open Source and we can only hope to act in it's best interest.

And in terms of why people are "trying to change all of this" I think it could be simply that they are looking for ways of integrating working in an open source model while paying the bills and feeding their family. It comes down to that, from what I see. We need to keep in mind that Microsoft, Sun, and Apple (and others), not only provide software but also livelihoods for millions of people. They are businesses that exist and function according to certain laws that permeate our entire economy. You should read Jeremy Rifkin because he talks about the economy of the future, and basically how radically different it'll function. Open Source will probably play into the model I imagine. But we have to be patient and have enough foresight to see that if the world just suddenly used open source software as it is, we'd probably send our economies into shock and put millions of people out of work. And considering that India has about 3 times out population with eager and skilled programmers waiting to "make it" they and about another few million from the middle east and asia would far outnumber any western software or service firms. They can offer anything cheaper because their cost of living is lower. You see, after a certain percentage of conversion the monster will be unleashed. It's like weight being put on a trigger of a gun. When the bullet has been fired you can't change it's direction. Where we are now is finding out where to point the thing. And the decisions we make are very very important because they'll decide the economic/socio/political forms that'll take shape in the future. Shooting from the hip is ill advised.