Open Source

Time to Endorse Open Source

What is Open Source?

Software products are usually sold, or given out as an executable file. In most cases, it is not possible and is potentially illegal to try and view the source code. Open source products, are generally given out as an executable and the source code. If they are not given out as an executable, they are give out as the source code and the users can compile and create executables.

My opinion of Open Source:

Open Source enthusiasts/evangelists, tend to be very pro Open Source - even criticizing for profit software companies. With this information in mind, we need to analyze how and why Open Source software companies started and continue to operate without receiving money from customers.  

For the most part, if someone were to reduce human nature to it’s bare or most basic concepts - they would inevitably point to social studies. When we consider Open Source, we need to keep-in-mind our bare human nature and most basic concepts. My reasoning behind this is because when researching Open Source, most findings are evangelists talking about how Open Source is: pure software, the utopia for software development and other praising compliments.

From my perspective, while human nature does have empathy and amiable feelings - it is not our base desire to do things purely for the success of others (not that some won’t/can’t). In my opinion, it is important to recognize social constructs like Maslow’s hierarchy of needs as true (to a degree - e.g. we look at people who do things for others as noble/esteemed). From this knowledge, we can make some conjecture/hypothesis’ about Open Source that is by definition of human nature, true.

The first conjecture, which was already somewhat stated, is that Open Source companies are not merely started by an overflowing of love/rainbows/goodness from peoples lives. Rather, they are started by intrinsic motivation (not a bad thing) or economic purposes (ranging from, but not limited to, adding a “free” alternative to a largely monopolized marketplace, to encourage variety or to initiate competition). I can’t give detailed examples of these, due to my blog constraints, but please research the origin of Linux, Firefox and Wikipedia (some links provided).

In my next few blogs about Open Source, I will go into detail about the origins of Linux, Firefox and Wikipedia - specifically pertaining to granddaddy investments or companies who won't let them sink, etc.

In conclusion, Open Source is a good thing - in spite of the naive nature of many evangelists who proclaim that Open Source is: pure software or the utopia of software development. It’s not in human nature, to purely do things for the good and well being of others. From that information alone, the evangelists are somewhat wrong, by definition of human nature.

Disclaimer-ish

I am in no way intending to attack Open Source - I currently run a distro of linux on my desktop. I love Open Source but I am frustrated with a lot of the negativity that Open Source enthusiasts give towards either Apple or Microsoft users. Windows and Apple (for the most part) produce solid products and more importantly, they keep trying to do better. With that being said, I am not intending to attack Open Source or say that all people should buy software, rather I feel that Open Source enthusiasts need to relax their claims for how amazing Open Source is.

Cheers,

Brandon

Sources/Inspiration

http://www.linux.org/

http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/about/history/

http://psychology.about.com/od/theoriesofpersonality/a/hierarchyneeds.htm