While I want everything to be open and interoperable, I personally work in a startup that aims to make profit. So I also understand the commercial reasons of proprietary technologies.
So, I am torn, what should be proprietary and what should be open?
Formats should never be proprietary. That's just holding user data hostage.
Really, nothing should be proprietary, or at least not proprietary forever.Take note of Id Software's approach of open-sourcing their engines X years after release of the accompanying game.
If we keep releasing proprietary systems, nothing will be archived or usable in the future, if the source is never released. Hundreds of video games are going to be inaccessible in the future due to DRM servers, or proprietary backends.
I mean, I can ramble on forever, but it's pretty clear that non-free[1] software is bad for the future of people and society. Snowden proved RMS right.
[1]: Free as in freedom: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html (You can still charge money for free software or related services. Not everyone can run their own Google, even if they open sourced it all. But that's a whole 'nother set or arguments.)
While I want everything to be open and interoperable, I personally work in a startup that aims to make profit. So I also understand the commercial reasons of proprietary technologies.
So, I am torn, what should be proprietary and what should be open?