http://www.osnews.com/story/10271/What_proprietary_software_can_teach_open_source_developers Exploring the Future of Computing en-us Copyright 2001-2009, David Adams adam+nospam@osnews.com Thu, 09 Jul 2009 21:06:20 GMT http://www.osnews.com/images/osnews.gif http://www.osnews.com http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? We should all learn from Windows.

Best
Software
Ever. Tue, 12 Apr 2005 16:36:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Skype, MSN6 (compared to other IM's), MSOffice owns OOo outright, Linux UI still is unbearable.

OSS still has some areas it need to learn a few things from.
But Firefox is one of the examples where they've got it right. Tue, 12 Apr 2005 16:47:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Have ypu tried the OOo 2.0 beta? I would not say that MSOffice owns it outright. Tue, 12 Apr 2005 16:55:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? All proprietary software is now Legacy code. OSS needs to be the teacher for proprietary software not the other way around. OSS is doing just fine, we are killing off the proprietary software market, slowly but surely. Windows is dead, office is dead. I know of no serious IT shop that has Windows installed anymore. Sun is trying to hang on but they are in their death throes as well. Tue, 12 Apr 2005 16:56:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? this is only applicable to traders. Free soft. gets until the thing is working without flaws. Anything beyond (wizards, assistants, orchestras and fireworks) starts to cost money and there are commercial distributions for that.

PD.: command-line becomes very addictive after some time of use. Tue, 12 Apr 2005 17:09:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? No Serious IT shop has windows or office?

Are you CRAZY? Office 2003 is being rolled out Every where. I dont see any major marketshare loses with windows either.

I like linux and bsd as much as the next Guy but any one that says Microsoft or proprietary software is finished, Is either a kid that does not know any better or is just stupid. Tue, 12 Apr 2005 17:11:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Now that's a troll if there was ever a troll! If all proprietary software is now Legacy code, eventually, going with your reasoning, all software will become OSS stuff. Yeah, right! Guess where a lot of OSS stuff comes from? Copycats of the functionality of what the proprietary software writers developed with their ideas and hard work pioneering through the hard stuff. Copying something that's already demonstrated to work well enough is hardly that innovative, and much less difficult in most cases, not to mention less time-consuming, than creating something from an original idea and finding all the ways it won't work.

If your troll comment proves to be true, eventually a large number of highly-trained people will be unable to do their preferred vocation for money, as most software, once it's written and is done properly, rarely needs external support to the point where people will pay for those services. Besides, if the developer is forced to provide such hand-holding, how can they go on and develop new stuff? The paradox is that a lot of the software that's great is the software that under the OSS concept you present, the original creators can't recoup costs, while others benefit. Eventually, the world will be a poorer place where the original creators have insufficient motivation to continue with their work, if things go like you'd prefer them to go. It's incredibly greedy to tell the software developers, "Just do this as your moonlighting job, and do something else for your real income!" when you wouldn't think of telling that to someone that spent many years of their life formally in school and all the associated bills and effort to learn how to do something, and have them do something for an unlivable wage, working at something they don't like, so they can give away all their major investment for "Free."

I dare you to ask for an Open Source Banker, Plumber, Business Analyst, etc. and ask that they give away their work for the good of the community, and see if they do so, and are able and willing to work at some other job they hate and aren't good at to support themselves and pay for their past investments. Software development, if you're serious about your career, requires far more schooling than just that done at college or before: the education never stops, because technology is always changing.

Again, if things go as you would like to see them go ("It's all free! WHEEEEEEE!") eventually software will be done by the unwashed (read: untrained) masses for the unwashed masses, and it will all be a mass of unwashed hacked-together code nobody wishes to deal with. And no, don't give the crappy argument "1000 heads (or however many) make for better code by inspection!" because in any development project where the developers aren't clones of each other, you will always have the overhead of them rewriting each other's work because it stinks in their eyes, and you will always have personality conflicts, and deal with turnover rate, just like in proprietary development, only much worse, because OSS developers don't have any vested financial interest in joining a herd of cats.

I hope to see you living in a cardboard box soon, because society has devalued your ability to contribute something useful for a price you can charge to make your ends meet: it'd be karma that got you as you deserved! Tue, 12 Apr 2005 17:14:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Fatal to your argument is the fact that true "innovation," even among proprietary programs, is exceedingly rare. Almost all proprietary software is just "copying" functionality already found in other programs. True innovation is rare, and where it does exist, its almost always in the form of a small incremental change over what existed prior to it. Even the most innovative of programs are comprised almost entirely of common, well known elements with addition of small number of novel elements.

And concerning the rest of your comment, it is true now, and has always been true, that the overwhelming majority of programers are employed doing "in-house" custom development, or building "bespoke" applications as part of a broader custom solution tailored to fit specific conditions. Tue, 12 Apr 2005 17:44:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? only much worse, because OSS developers don't have any vested financial interest in joining a herd of cats.

Where do you get the most recruits from?

We have have something you guys don't -->plenty of time Tue, 12 Apr 2005 18:05:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? But Firefox is one of the examples where they've got it right.

Not really. Opera has far more functionality than Mozilla Suite or a 100-extension-laden Firefox and yet is substantially faster (upwards of 5x at rendering), smaller (both in memory and on disk), and more secure than any Mozilla-based browser (with the possible exception of K-Meleon on size). Tue, 12 Apr 2005 18:43:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? "I rather am in my basement than in any of those cubicles."



Still live with your mother? When she kicks the bucket, you will have to find something that pays the bills, And if you are not making money off coding, then what is next?
hope mcdonalds is hiring where you are. Tue, 12 Apr 2005 18:44:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? What proprietary software can teach open source developers?

That's like trying to teach a class but not letting any students take notes or read the book.

Open source software, however, still has the same problems with copyright and patents. So its like trying to teach a class with free books, pencils and paper in the middle of a minefield.

Simply frustrating. Tue, 12 Apr 2005 19:20:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Opera has far more functionality than Mozilla Suite or a 100-extension-laden Firefox and yet is substantially faster (upwards of 5x at rendering), smaller (both in memory and on disk), and more secure than any Mozilla-based browser (with the possible exception of K-Meleon on size).

It's hard not to burn your fingers with saying some(any) browser is secure.All have had their vulnerabilities.And still have.

Would be my opinion to let the most downloaded extentions be installed per deafult with the package itself.This way there's for a lot of users not direct a reason to download and risk something. Tue, 12 Apr 2005 20:09:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? @emagius

Remember this article is about OSS learning about Popularity of closed-source programs. Not how good it is. And last time I checked Firefox was well ahead of Opera regards popularity. Firefox may not be technically as good as Opera, but it's being improved as well as having popularity. Very little OSS is "popular" at all. No real reason it should be that way and Firefox is one particular piece that has broken into popularity. Tue, 12 Apr 2005 20:12:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Still live with your mother? When she kicks the bucket, you will have to find something that pays the bills, And if you are not making money off coding, then what is next?

I'm 13 ,so not dead enough to join the dead meat at MC.You got my point though i'm sure.Freelance coding is also an option.Better to code in an inspiring environmnet that's what i actually had in mind. Tue, 12 Apr 2005 20:17:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? yawn: What proprietary software can teach open source developers?

That's like trying to teach a class but not letting any students take notes or read the book.

Actually some "proprietary sofware companies" are somewhat (to very) liberal with their source code, but they don't have what would be considered an "open source"/"free software" license.

One in particular that I can vaguely recall, allowed me to view the source code, modify the source code, and distribute binaries of their source code as I wished. As far as my source code went (including my modifications), I could place them under any license I liked and do with them what I liked. Basicly, I just couldn't give THEIR source code to anyone else.

That type of license is obviously not common though and I last used that program quite a long time ago. (As in years) Tue, 12 Apr 2005 20:19:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Jophn: I'm 13 ,so not dead enough to join the dead meat at MC.You got my point though i'm sure.Freelance coding is also an option.Better to code in an inspiring environmnet that's what i actually had in mind.

Some big companies can actually be very nice. They can sometimes be better than working for small companies or even on your own.

I'm a full-time CSC graduate student at a university, but I have some friends who work for some big companies and they LOVE going to work. Tue, 12 Apr 2005 20:25:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? There are many advantages that proprietary development have over open source.

Money is one. Most open source developers don't get paid so have to do it in their offtime.

Proprietary developers tend to be close to each other so that they can have face-to-face time, whiteboards, brainstorming meetings etc.

Proprietary developers are forced to collaborate and not just fork something over because they don't like some other guys.

The only time that open source seems to work is in large projects with lots of momentum Tue, 12 Apr 2005 20:47:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Everyone I know that's tried it has either become addicted, or it was installed by a friend without their knowledge and they still don't know they use it!

Personally, I have a love/hate relationship with it. Have since .8, I like .7 and .6, but .8 was just awful! Tue, 12 Apr 2005 21:13:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? uuuhh... try 1.02 Tue, 12 Apr 2005 21:50:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? First of all there is money in open source. Look at all the top developers in linux, they are all getting payed to work on there code. People have to realize that linux is relatively new compared to Windows. Sure linux has existed for 15-20 years, but only has had large scale development in the last 6 years and this was mostly server development. Now the eyes are on the desktop. Look how far linux has come along in the last 6 years. It is only going to get better and faster.

Just wait until the boiling point hits. It is hard as hell to hit 20% in the desktops, but after that 50% is easy. Tue, 12 Apr 2005 23:24:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? [chris@rachel ~]$ firefox --version
Mozilla Firefox 1.0.2, Copyright (c) 2004 mozilla.org

Thanks, already there . .9 was pretty good, it was just version .8 that was obnoxious. Although, 1.x still has some issues, but they could also be my extensions :/. Wed, 13 Apr 2005 00:59:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? I don't really get the point of this article. It's already happening. The past years a lot of open source projects have been focusing on making their software more attractive for a wider audience. Many of them have graphics artists and UI designers on their teams, something that was a rare find five years ago.
The only Windows users I've heard complaining over the Gnome desktop for example are experienced users who are used to having things a certain way and refuse to change. Most avarage users that sit in front of my Ubuntu box has never had a problem using it, and some even wanted to switch because they think it looks so clean and consistant compared to Windows.
For the people who only use pre-installed software, a good linux distro can be very attractive. For more advanced users it still has a long way to go in my opinion.

The only thing that is keeping opensource software from gaining much popularity is marketing and piracy in my opinion. To most people word processing is equal with MS Word, image editing = Photoshop, audio recording = Cubase or ProTools, PC = Windows etc. These are names that has been around forever, and such names takes a lot of marketing and time to wipe away. It can be done though, how many young people know about Word Perfect these days for example?
But the opensource world just doesn't have the money for that kind of marketing.

However, a lot of open source software or lesser known proprietary software for that matter would have been more popular if it wasn't for piracy.
People rather use a pirated version of MS Word to write a simple letter than to download OOo or AbiWord, they prefer to use Photoshop CS over Gimp 2.0 to scale down their family photos etc. It's not because it's better, but because it's more comfortable. Comfortable to know that they are using a professional grade software, comfortable because they don't have to learn anything new. And they don't need to pay anything either way.

These are the main issues in my opinion. But they aren't impossible to overcome. It takes time however, a lot of time. Wed, 13 Apr 2005 01:49:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? I think this article hit on something key. In my experience the OS community is learning more and more about making OS sustainable and palpable for the mainstream pallette but there's still quite a ways to go. And in my opinion part of that journey is in destroying this illusory "Us vs. Them" scenario that every Free Software/Open Source extremist stands by. What's amazing about OS is it's ability to TRANSCEND current operating systems and software but also INCLUDE. And it isn't possible to do the former before the latter, it's the nature of evolution itself in all natural systems. It seems the more that OS embraces the modes and methods of of an older paradigm rather then rejecting them out of ignorance or elitism OS will be empowered with all their gifts and yet shine beyond their flaws. There should be as much innovation as integration, then nothing is left behind. And when nothing is left behind people will have no other choice but to adopt OS, because it will be the best OS, nothing will compare. It can evolve and change faster to the user's needs than any other operating system; it's a super-organism that can adapt to the evolutionary pressures caused by it's environment near an instant. That's amazing. But what we currently lack is integration, which Apple and Microsoft both have, so cheers to them! Credit's do where credit's earned! Like old religions that have been around for thousands of years they rely on their traditions for stability. If it isn't broke, why fix it? If people buy it, why radically change it? Whereas the open source community is constantly clammering at each other and splintering like broken glass--the collective OS community is schizophrenic. Get it? No? Synopsis: INTEGRATE, INNOVATE, INTEGRATE, INNOVATE, or INCLUDE, TRANSCEND, INCLUDE, TRANSCEND, and on and on and up and up into infinity we go ever striving for perfection and always almost getting there.

"From the many to the One" -Andrew Cohen

-Paul Wed, 13 Apr 2005 04:03:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? That is the point of opensource, the source code is open to support integration. Granted it is not all there, but at the same time there is more. Like rhythembox turning down the volume when your phone rings (via modem).All these proprietary frameworks that are made for integration fail because the companies hide their api or charge money for it. The source is the best framework for integration.

Here is a cool idea, mix apt-get/emerge/yum with dashboard. So when you visit a application website, dashboard will notify you that apt-get has the app in it's repository. Source code allows you to do this, but being a third party doesn't. You will have to wait for microsoft to implement the framework. I pefer not to wait and just do it. In microsoft land you are always at their mercy.

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. Wed, 13 Apr 2005 06:29:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? "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. Wed, 13 Apr 2005 08:33:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Open source software, however, still has the same problems with copyright and patents. So its like trying to teach a class with free books, pencils and paper in the middle of a minefield.

I believe you understand it, but thought it would be good to clarify this: Intellectual Property is a real danger, something people and companies should be very careful with. However, it is not limited to Open Source: in fact probably the chance that OSS code illegally finds its way into proprietary code is higher than the chance that proprietary code enters OSS software.

On other words: you don't run more risk using OSS code than you do using proprietary code, and for both you should read and understand the license. Wed, 13 Apr 2005 08:52:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Personally I think the title (and therefore the thesis) of this article could have been better.

How's about: "What creators of high quality software can teach creators of low quality software".

Let's face it: zealots (of ALL kinds) aside, there is strong and weak software and the development method doesn't guarantee either. However, I would be interested in getting away from the presumptions like those the article makes, and instead focus and what good quality software is made of. Let's look at success stories, whether proprietary or open source, and see what they have in common. Then we can learn to make better software for everyone.

Does this make sense? Wed, 13 Apr 2005 14:36:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments