I wonder how much of this discrepancy is driven by the motive of the person writing such software. I remember how amazingly crappy the Roxio CD burning software was, mostly it was tool to sell labelling supplies and CDR blanks. Pretty much all the open source I've used was written by someone who really wanted to write it rather than achieve some alternative objective by making it available.
A lot of the crap software is white label, like you say; something to sell something else. It's like most hardware; if you buy a camera you get free editing software which is white labelled crap usually but at least you can tick the boxes compared to your competitors.
Then there is the 'getting rich' thing which is more prevalent than, I think, most people here realize. Currently it's about apps => get rich making apps; there are countless 'internet marketing' ebooks online how you make apps without programming and 'get rich' doing it. This used to be actual printed books 'how to become the next Bill G.', usually with VB/Delphi like 'almost codeless' development. A lot of crap comes out of that unfortunately.
If you go to Google and type in "make your own software", you'll find a site with the same domain as the keyword. And guess what? It's "patent pending."
To a lot of buddies of mine who want to learn programming, I keep saying that "writing code" is a very small part of it. But one cannot understand that statement without going the distance.
Yeah http://www.makeyourownsoftware.com/ this is a very famous one; and he sold a lot of copies (the original developer). What it does is it allows you to make a doc with variables; you 'save an .exe' which you give/sell to clients; when the client starts the application they get a form with those variables to enter and then the doc appears with those variables in it.
I have seen those 'apps' on download sites, like 'unique recipe printing application' and such. It doesn't even store the result. Another, more modern, 'no coding software creator' is ; http://www.profittigersystems.com/vbforum/ which also sold quite well and at least can do a bit more. But from this 'codeless' stuff comes mostly garbage which you can find for sale on eBay and such.
I can agree wholeheartedly. At this point, if software is freeware, I don't see as reason as to why it shouldn't be open source in this day and age. While there are probably numerous reasons, it's certainly created a mindset of suspicion, regardless of how valid that suspicion is.
There are a fair amount of things that are better when they're not free. I remember spending a half hour or so wading through free credit report offers online to find one I could pay fifteen dollars for.
Why? In that case no one's doing it for fun do they have to be making money somewhere to pay for the ads. I'll take the devil I know over the devil I don't.
With open source you know why it's free - the least altruistic possibility is there's a user whose main motivation is solving the particular issue you have, and that it's open in the hopes that someone can improve it. With freeware, who knows.
Yes, there are a lot of kinds of software that are better if they're paid. The main reason being the amount of concentrated research and work that has to be done. And let's not forget copyrighted and patented technologies that can make something "non-free."
GIMP is great, but Photoshop is a killer tool. Same goes with Computer Algebra Systems and Electronics tools. These are areas where open source is yet to catch up.
However, when it comes to web servers, programming languages, databases, and any great cutting edge technology, open source just rocks. The very building blocks of most of the software today is open source. And that's marvelous.
In other words, utility software (that is, software that has a use for a wide variety of applications such as OS, server tools and programming languages) tend to be more and more free - simply because so many people need it, that it quickly turns into a sort of commodity.
Specialist software, which includes photoshop, but there are heaps of others like electronic circut design software, and geological survey software, tend to be paid for simply because no one uses it (other than the handful of profrssionals). The cost to make them can't be amortized across millions of its users.
I honestly can't think of one proprietray program I've paid for (and I have bought some expensive software) that exceeds the quality or reliability of the free, open source programs I use.
Sometimes I feel like I've been duped by every vendor I've paid for software. It sounds terrible to say that, but honestly the open source stuff just blows the commercial stuff away. Alas, open source is just not possible for all software needs; it only covers so much.
I know one you have paid for: OS. If it is Windows or Mac OS X, you have paid for it. If it is Linux you have either paid for it with your time spent for configuring it or by buying more expensive hardware that just work with Linux. If your time is cheap that's OK. If you got lucky with configuration - many people don't.
I happened to have purchased Lenovo laptops because I like the keyboards and generally believe that the reason Apple laptops are better than the majority of Windows laptops is because people are willing to spend more on quality hardware. I prefer the industrial design of Richard Sapper to Jonathan Ives so it was a no-brainer.
After running Windows for a while and getting bored of using KiTTY for SSH I switched to Linux Mint.
I honestly have configured nothing. It all just worked, and installation was less than 10 minutes end-to-end.
I know you will say I got lucky, or that I spent more money... but luck didn't come into it and I spent not a penny more than I did for the Windows machine and good industrial design.
If you just use the system, it just works. I've had zero pain in my personal computing for a long time now. I don't understand the "Linux costs you time" mantra.
> I don't understand the "Linux costs you time" mantra.
its because this mantra is FUD that opponants of GNU/linux often use to discredit it. If you spoke to a businessman who doesn't know his microsoft from his unixes, he might be veryeasily convinced that something which would've costed thousands could've been had for free must have some sort of catch. Because physical goods that you can get for free always has some sort of catch (whether its just for adverts, or whether the "free" month of trials automatically becomes a paid month the 2nd its over etc). Most people aren't equpped to deal with software, simply because its so new and recent, and the brain is evolved to deal with the physical and the now.
Like when software used to come in a box. That packaging was like some sort of tether to the world of physical goods.
You might be going a little strong on the FUD thing though. I think many businesses are tapping into open source and what can be built with it, especially your beloved Linux kernel. Even going so far as companies like Wal-Mart opening an office in Silicon Valley and launching startups. Whether this is all good or bad I can't yet tell. Just as our inclinations are toward physical goods that come in attractive packaging, we have inclinations to try to make all aspects of a business proprietary and confidential with the belief it gives a competitive advantage.
It just feels strange to try to sell something that was never meant ot be commercial and price it high in order to create some illusion in the mind of a purchaser. But maybe that's just me.
Well, I'm big GNU/Linux proponent but I will never ever use on Linux on my laptop or desktop unless it will support Linux out-of-the-box. I just got fed-up after 14 years of trying to do that. There are machines that work really well with Linux (e.g. Thinkpads) but a lot of cheaper machines is royal pain in the ass.
This is a frustrating problem. Not only with Linux (which I'd argue has some of the best support of any open src OS).
The only solution I've come up with is to steer away from hardware that is brand new on the market. Buy stuff that is a few years old.
With an open source OS, it's still going to as fast (probably faster, and certainly more agile) than new hardware coming fresh off the assembly line loaded down with the latest crapware OS.
I don't worry about OS as well. I have at least 14 years experience with Linux desktop, a little bit more with Windows and 2 years with OS X. I simply got fed up with Linux Desktop.
I'm from Eastern Europe therefore I'm person who looks for cheaper machines usually. Cheaper machines (e.g. not Thinkpads) don't work properly with Linux. E.g. check out GMA500 thread in Ubuntu forums.
In the past 3-4 years, I've never spent more time installing and configuring Linux (Ubuntu) on my PCs than I have doing the same with Windows (even where Windows came pre-installed). And I spend more time trouble-shooting Windows post-install than I do Linux. May be I've been lucky.
But I'm not using any of those. (I have used all of them though [OSX, Windows, Linux] so I know what they're like.) Nice try. :)
As I said I feel terrible saying this about proprietary software. I've worked for companies that sell commercial software. But I'm just being honest. The open source stuff is the best I've used.
It's things like this which make me want to create a free, opensource, fully featured but well designed version of the various software programs I occasionally need to use. Something without gimmicks, easy to use, doesn't have a super-flashy interface.
Audials Tunebite and all the Roxio tools are a mess with all non-standard interface items. Do I click this to get a menu of options or is it a button? I can't tell! Is this element disabled or is it just not activated because my mouse isn't hovering on it? What is crash number 0x0000###? Why did it randomly close?
And then there is FileZilla. I like that software and encouraged its use at my employer. I've had ZERO trouble with the server and the client. But the interface could be a bit simpler, and a nice template packaging for corporate installs would be nice. Too many buttons, outdated buttons, and extra options are problematic. Anytime I see someone struggling with some other ftp client I always steer them towards FileZilla (since it is now company policy, thanks to me), but there are some things that could be cleaned up.
Unfortunately, I'm not a C programmer and I currently don't have the time or energy. Wife, puppy, condo -- you know the drill.
My theory is that there is a direct correlation between the quality of free software and the likelihood that developers directly or indirectly use the software for their work. The exception is utilities, but for non-dev business tools, commercial applications tend to be better than free software.
Open source software also means that you won't be trapped with some dead-end software when the developer goes out of business or changes their business model.
This is almost true. I've been burned by unmaintained Open Source software as well (which resulted in costly in house maintenance) as well as commercial software disappearing.
Keeping all your eggs in one basket is the real problem.
