Is Open Source Dying? Case Not Proven

Engineering
Rod Johnson
June 29, 2007

Michael Hickins recently published a piece on eWeek entitled Is Open Source Dying? The title drew me in, and no doubt plenty of other folk too. But the article doesn’t prove the case, although it contains some interesting points that merit discussion.

Most of the article concerns speculation about the experience of government with open source, and the motives of vendors such as IBM. I prefer to judge companies and individuals by their actions, rather than speculation about their motives, and there is plenty of evidence that IBM, for example, takes open source very seriously. There’s plenty of open source in WebSphere, for example.

I’m going to pick up on just two points. The first, is the statement that:

The Free Software Foundation and Linux continue to engage in a pissing match over some of the terms of GPLv3, making the open-source community seem, once again, like splinter groups of some radical political organization more interested in winning arcane theological disputes than actually taking power.

This reflects one of the most widespread fallacies about open source. Open source is not a single monolithic movement, and nor should it be. The fallacy becomes more obvious when I paraphrase it:

Oracle and SAP continue to engage in a pissing match over [insert latest issue], making the closed-source community seem, once again, like splinter groups of some radical political organization more interested in winning arcane theological disputes than actually retaining power.

That quote is equally meaningless.

Open source is no more a single entity than “closed source.” And many closed source companies compete fiercely and criticize each other at every opportunity. I’ve heard CEOs of large closed source companies make cheap shots at competitors in keynotes that made me cringe. Different closed source vendors are proponents of different models such as perpetual licensing, subscriptions and software as a service, and many vigorously argue why theirs is the only true path. As for licensing, there are many licenses for closed source software and they are harder to categorize than the various major groups of open source licenses. Does that mean that closed source software is in crisis? Absolutely not. Competition between models and philosophies is generally healthy, and fosters customer choice, and open source is no different.

Furthermore, mature vendors, both open and closed source, realise that it is in the interests of customers to mix match both kinds of license to build solutions. The agenda of open source companies should not be to “take power,” but to deliver great software that gives customers choice. License fundamentalism regarding open or closed source is naive and counter-productive.

However, the conclusion of the article is spot on:

...the open-source community needs to get over its overweening sense of superiority and messianic inevitability; the alternative is just good enough that if it doesn't get its act together, open source may find itself the subject of retrospectives like "Remember Unix?"

I agree. Most decision makers care about outcomes, TCO and quality software. The development and distribution model is secondary. I believe that open source products should never sell themselves short. They should aim to provide the best solution in their space, and to innovate: not compete on price. Open source projects and businesses who believe that they are destined to inherit their space are likely to be intellectually lazy and deserve to fail, for the good of users.
comments powered by Disqus

translate：
翻译：

开源不仅仅是“封闭源”的单一实体。许多封闭源代码公司在每一个机会上都进行激烈竞争并互相批评。我听说大型封闭源码公司的首席执行官在主题演讲中对竞争对手competitors之以鼻，这让我感到畏缩。不同的闭源供应商是不同模式的支持者，例如永久许可，订阅和软件即服务，并且许多人都激烈地争辩说为什么只有这样才是真正的道路。至于许可，有许多封闭源软件的许可，它们比各种主要的开放源许可组更难分类。这是否意味着封闭源软件处于危机之中？绝对不。模型和哲学之间的竞争通常是健康的，并且会促进客户的选择，而开源也是如此。

而且，成熟的供应商（包括开放源代码和封闭源代码）都意识到，混合使用两种许可以构建解决方案符合客户的利益。开源公司的议程不应该是“夺取权力”，而是要提供能够为客户提供选择的出色软件。关于开放源代码或封闭源代码的许可证原教旨主义是天真的，并且适得其反。

但是，本文的结论是：

开源社区必须克服其优越感和弥赛亚式的必然性；替代方案就足够好了，如果不采取行动，开源可能会发现自己是诸如“还记得Unix吗？”之类的回顾性主题。

我同意。大多数决策者都在关注结果，总体拥有成本和质量软件。开发和分配模型是次要的。我相信开放源代码产品绝不能卖空。他们应该致力于在自己的空间中提供最佳解决方案，并进行创新：不要在价格上竞争。相信自己注定要继承其空间的开源项目和企业很可能在智力上是懒惰的，应该为了用户的利益而失败。
由Disqus提供动力的评论

Is Open Source Dying? Case Not Proven相关推荐

docker 的mysql镜像使用手册官网原文日期2017-05-25
官网地址点击这里 Supported tags and respective Dockerfile links 8.0.1,8.0, 8 (8.0/Dockerfile) 5.7.18,5.7, 5, ...
LifeCycle原理分析
文章目录简述 LifeCycle的原理 1.绑定观察者.被观察者 2.被观察者实现LifecycleOwn接口 3.总结简述解耦是永恒不变的话题,但是又不得不做.平时在onCreate方法中初始 ...
深入理解Spark：核心思想与源码分析. 3.9　启动测量系统MetricsSystem
3.9 启动测量系统MetricsSystem MetricsSystem使用codahale提供的第三方测量仓库Metrics,有关Metrics的具体信息可以参考附录D.MetricsSystem ...
关于ueditor多图上传加水印
最近小二哥应运营要求,需在后台编辑器做图片添加水印功能,由于ueditor编辑器本身没有添加水印的功能: 所以小二哥参考了网上的一些方法,加上实现的步骤整理成文档,希望对需要的人有帮助. 1.打开ue ...
python爬虫基础(一)～爬虫概念和架构
目录 1. 爬虫 1.1 概念 1.2 分类 2. 爬虫架构 2.1 url管理器 2.2 网页(html)下载(download)器 2.2.1 urllib下载html源码 2.2.2 reque ...
高级停靠(Dock)技术的实现
所谓停靠就是可以用鼠标拖动窗体或者控件,并将其从一个父窗体移出或者移动到另一个父窗体上,可以按水平,垂直方向整齐排列, 并且可以停靠在分页控制组件上.下面的示意图是一个Delphi IDE的窗口停靠 ...
ue编辑器拖拽上传图片_为百度UE编辑器上传图片添加水印功能
前些日子把phpcms的内置编辑器改成了百度UE编辑器,非常好用,但是有个地方不是很满意,就是没法给上传的图片加水印了,经过一番研究终于实现了出来,分享给大家 UEditor编辑器上传图片是自动提取的 ...
iOS多线程开发（三）－－－Run Loop（一）
Run Loop Run Loop就是一个事件处理的循环,用来不停的调动工作以及处理输入事件.使用Run Loop的目的就是节省CPU效率,线程在有工作的时候忙于工作,而没工作的时候处于休眠状态. 一 ...
PHP实现图片马赛克效果
原理: 对图片中选定区域的每一像素,增加若干宽度及高度,来生成矩型.而每一像素的矩型重叠在一起,就形成了马赛克效果.本例使用GD库的imagecolorat获取像素颜色,使用imagefilledre ...
Spring注解编程基石（四）
目录 AnnotationsScanner 扫描方法扫描source为Class方法扫描source为Method方法辅助方法 MergedAnnotationSelector MergedAn ...

Is Open Source Dying? Case Not Proven

Is Open Source Dying? Case Not Proven相关推荐

最新文章

热门文章