As the open-source movement is gains momentum, the debate over its future heats up. Can this loosely-formed coalition be able to withstand the pressure of Microsoft and other big companies that live off proprietary software? Read about it at ZDNet.
Open Source–the Next Generation
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
If not for the big companies (excluding MS) there would be no serious open source. Let’s not forget that every major project today is either developed or sponsored by these companies. Big hardware manufacturers are mostly interested in selling hardware thus they decided that open source is great source of revenue (who know whether this is smart in long-term).
MS and now Sun are realizing that open source is as much of a threat as a benefit. IBM, DELL and HP is still pushing open source, but will it’s support last is question.
Today, only real threat for open source is that large enterprise players will stop pumping money into development then quality of software will slowly return to mid-1990s and open source will once again be forgotten.
(if things will continue the way the go today, many software companies will loose their business and those remaining will just close their standards as Nokia, Ericson and Motorola are doing already). Overall since introduction of open source software did not get any better. Only real winners are places like Lindows, who did not do nothing but now are collecting meager fruits of work done elsewhere.
open source has never innovated. The fact is smart software engineers are spending their minds writing commercial software to make a living. This is where you will find the newest technologies, not from some hippy mimmicking what is already out there.
“open source has never innovated”
You should capitalize your sentences.
And not call people names.
can you say m o z i l l a. sure i knew that you could
.
“””The fact is smart software engineers are spending their minds writing commercial software to make a living. “””
The great minds writing software are still working in Private R&D or at the universities; they most definitely aren’t writing anything directly marketable.
Your quote is funny.
smart software engineers from Redhat, SuSE, IBM, Ximian and dozens of other companies work every day on opensource code.
The question is whether or not the support for enterprise level solutions will continue or will the company support be reduced down to the core companies distributing linux OS distributions.
I’ve mentioned this before: the icon of a GNU which is more closely associated with the GNU Project isn’t a good representation of “open source,” which just goes to reinforce the confusion between the two terms.
if you have morons doing the programming you won’t get good software.
Copying and evolving are not innovating so Mozillia is not an innovation – neither is Internet Explorer.
I consider Perl to be a good example of open source innovation since it was more than an evolution (imho). But that really wasn’t an open source project to begin with but rather the work of one man that eventually became an open source project (if I understand Perl history correctly).
PEOPLE innovate, not movements or governments or intangibles. Some environments make it more likely to produce innovative products…research labs, schools, living off of one’s parents at home, etc. When you are free to follow a dream and have the resources then it becomes more likely…when you work 8-6 pushing paper or doing “consulting” work and have a family then it becomes a bit harder.
Open/free software is here to stay because a lot of people think it is a good idea. Turning it into a political movement that denies people the right to use proprietary software is insane and no better than forcing a religion on someone.
For an atheist, Stallman certainly is religious and not very permissive of other views
Ok, then show me the good OpenSource software Mr. RMS. I still need good PCB Software (OpenSource) that can easily deal with Cadence. I need a good UML Program OpenSource that easily deals with Rational Rose Enterprise edition. I’m still searching for a OpenSource Desktop that does not suck. I need a GOOD Office Suite that flawlessly ex-/import Microsoft Office documentations without restyling the Text multiple times so I need to adjust them again and again. There is a lot of quantity Software but no Quality Software. Not even the poor tries of Redhat creating a unified Desktop will change it. A bad mixture of GNOME and KDE apps that still look, akt and work differently.
Mozilla 1.2.1 is pretty good, Open Office 1.0.1 is pretty good, If you want total compatability, get fricken wine or pony up some bucks for Codeweavers crossover office.
The point of open source software isn’t to be 100% compatible with existing proprietary software. The point is to give out the damn code with each sale and allow people to modify it! There’s plenty of PCB software out there that’s either free, or obsolete– feel free to try it. Do a search on Sourceforge for “PCB layout”. I’m an electronics engineer and just like you am looking for good quality PCB layout/schematic capture software that’s free & opensource.
Things do happen pretty slowly when you have a job, a life, and try to program as a hobby.
personally, I’ll probably never use MS office again, as OpenOffice meets all of my Office needs (AND I HAPPEN TO LIKE ITS TINY FILE SIZE IN ITS NATIVE FORMAT.)
Have you ever used MS Write, or Word Pad, or Notepad? they suck?
THe library of bad proprietary software is as large as the plume of hot air coming out of your mouth.
Since you like to complain why not contribute? Talk to the developers of FREE open source PCB layout software and tell them all you know about Cadence. Tell them all about the bugs you’ve encoutered with their software. Talk to the developers of OpenOffice, or another Free Open Suite–there’s a few. Do it without insulting someone–would you insult a friend of yours who’s working on your car for free?
Sometimes you can’t get exactly what you want when you want it–be patient. I really want 1 OS that will play all my DOS4GW 5Star Panzer General games, and play WarCraft3 & BF1942 & other Direct X & open GL titles flawlessly and FAST. I want to use an OS that doesn’t collect and distribute information on me. I want to be able to contribute to its development anyway I can. I want to be able to install and uninstall software without any hinderance what so ever. I also want to be able to FULLY customize my os all the way down to its core–making it small enough to run in embedded products.
In the mean time I’ll dual boot several OS’s & try out free & opensource API emulators and use uLinux.
The innovation in Open Source is that it gives the user the ability to customize the hell out of it.
How fast did Mozilla fix that DHTML bug? 1.2 to 1.2.1 was pretty damn fast.
I for one am THRILLED that a group of individuals is trying to create a FREE Open Source BIOS. Obviously that’s a HUGE task–starting with which platform do you start with, then at what level do you begin. I can’t wait to see what develops.
dong dong dong… Wrong answer… Now go back, think about it for some mins and then come back.
What I was trying to point out is that there is not much in the OpenSource repository that meets my and my customers needs. Nothing available could halfway compete with the POS Software which are THE industry standards outside.
Yes, I searched for days in all kind of places to find suitable PCB programs that supports multiple Layers, that is able to simulate Systems, auto-route them etc. There is NO SUCH thing available for Linux and opensource. I am talking here for a serious product that can be held responsible for eventual failures that was caused by the Software itself. The reality looks a bit more complicated and differently that what you were trying to reply my friend. A lot of things in the OpenSource market is still FAR FAR away from being usable in a productive environment. Just don’t lie to you.
Using things like Codeweaver and Winex or stuff like this are no option here. I have no time dealing half a day into installations etc. I want to switch on, load the program and get productive. Before dealing with finding OS related programs for my work I’d be better off using WindowsXP and the Program. Even purchasing that program for commercial business will get cheaper at the final end.
The purpose of Codeweavers and sites like this one:
http://frankscorner.org/wine/index.php
is to simplify the installation of Windows software under linux, etc. Once you setup, or find someone who will write preconfigured instalation scripts, you’re good to go.
granted, there are no opensource rivals to anything even like good ole’ Or-Cad or Multi-Sim. Atleast those two were cheaper than fricken ViewLogic. It’s gonna take a hell of a long time before anyone releases a truly great PCB/schematic package (i’d guess 2 years.) As far as a warranty on software? Are you serious? Does Cadence offer one as you seem to suggest?
While I can see you’re a busy guy, we all are–seriously though, stick with 1 or 2 Linux PCB layout suites and provide feedback to their creators! There are VERY FEW ENGINEERS WHO ARE WILLING TO USE SOFTWARE OTHER THAN WHAT THEY ARE COMFORTABLE WITH.
Question:
Do you run a PCB creating house? In what business are you in? I don’t need to hear your company’s name, I’m just curious from what field are these comments coming. Also, what type of products do you develop? I develop Class D switching power supplies & audio amplifiers. I also do some simple peripheral products in the fire/life safety/security business.
OMG I’ve been brainwashed into trying an IT course….
Well I’m well aware of things like CodeWeaver, Wine, VMware etc. But that is not the point. My initial message was a direct reply to the address of RMS where I said that I’m missing a lot of professional OPENSOURCE applications. Using named products of yours will require me to use the POS applications again (somehow hacked under Linux) that is not my point nor what I’m up to. Before using Wine, Codeweavers or VMware I’d better off using these programs native under Windows. What I’m doing here. The money for purchasing these products can easily be nailed off to the customers. And please don’t try to turn around in words now I think that I clearly described what I was up to, there is no need to repeat it over and over again.
Well I don’t think you are into the elctronics business otherwise ‘cadence’ would have rung a bell in your head already so you wouldn’t happen to come up and ask me in what direction I’m.
But anyways I answer you, I’m into electronics Board design and Hardware for it. I depend on good software where I can simulate circuits, lay them out on a Virtual sheet and have them Autoroute for me including calculations of short ways etc.
What you want to show me all the time is a PRO-OpenSource picture which I’m well aware off but you offer me ‘ways around solving things’ instead of real native solutions.
So open source software isn’t for you. You are an asshole anyway, so no loss there. I can see you contributing tons of source code back to the project (sarcasm).
> You are an asshole anyway
Refreshing. Did your parents thaught you this ?
> “Refreshing. Did your parents thaught you this ? ”
The proper spelling and grammar would be, “Did your parents TEACH you this?”
Ogg (www.vorbis.com) has replaced MP3, for me. It should; it’s simply superior.
DScaler (www.dscaler.com) has replaced all other TV viewing apps that come with TV cards, for me.
Mozilla is preferred over IE (tho probably not Opera).
CDex has replaced all other CD ripping programs.
OpenOffice.org has completely replaced pirated Office, for me.
There are heaps of video processing/DVD tools that I use like VirtualDub, that I’d be lost without, and heaps more that rely on Open Source software to function (Vidomi, etc)
The link? All Open Source, and most, if not all, are the best in their class. I, for one, am thankful
My company is pretty small so we don’t have anything like cadence. The drafting dept. does our pcb layout with view logic, the Eng. dept uses multi-sim. Kind of retarded since multi-sim makes a utili-board & utili-route package.
SO because I don’t use Cadence means I’m not in the electronics business? funny, guess my customers are imaginary too.
Open source doesn’t meet your needs now, then check back in 2 years since you don’t want to contribute constructive criticism to the creators of GNU-EDA. I fully understand what you meant now by your original comments.
You’re a professional requiring an auto-router…..I’ve heard of people like that- i think they’re called students.
No, my bitterness and jaded view of reality is a product of the world I live in.
Apparently yours did not do enough teaching.
🙂
(blah, ot)
I’ve believed for awhile now that certain tools such as OS, basic command line tools, and development tools such as gcc should be open-source and free of charge. Like GNU/Linux.
However, unlike RMS, I do believe there is a place for proprietary software in the world. My only caveat is that the source code should be available to the user on request or for a reasonable license fee.
Even if users cannot redistribute software freely, they should be able to make changes to fit their needs or figure out what the software is doing.
To anonymous @ dip.t-dialin.net I don’t know if you can get recourse from your commercial software company, that is payment for time lost or damage if their software doesn’t work correctly. However, with an open source solution (if there was one for your application) you or some expert at your company could identify and fix whatever software problem there was. Or you could hire some consultant to fix the problem. That, to me, is the strength of open source. It gives more responsibility to the end user and removes a level of indirection when there is a bug or problem to be fixed.
I think it also increases the likelihood of the problem being fixed in a timely manner, if at all.
We know what you want. You don’t really care what the software is as long as its automaticly installed, configured and setup just the way you like. And as long as you can blame someone else for any bugs you find or any lost hours of work you have to report to your boss.
Unfortunately OSS software doesn’t care about you or your demands. They are interested in making a quality product and working WITH someone, not being treated like a rag doll for accidently writing a bug in your precious application. That’s probably why they give it away for free. Its much better to work in an environment where everyone wants to work together and help eachother learn and work through problems than it is to work with people like you. So sue me. .!..
However, unlike RMS, I do believe there is a place for proprietary software in the world.
FUD
Why do morons say these things? That’s like saying Bill Gates wants you to pay for every piece of software you own. He may want you to buy many copies of Microsoft software, but he could really care less what software you use as long as his company makes a profit. That’s a capitalist perspective, and I respect that. What I don’t respect is people who spread FUD discredit open source on the grounds that it denies your freedom to buy proprietary software or is nothing but crappy code. Those are flat out lies. Pull the other one.
The philosophy behind OSS is to work together and give people freedom, including the proper tools to use the hardware they’ve paid a lot of money for. It is unfortunate that commercial entities are having a hard time adopting their business models to be successful in a free market. And here we all thought capitalism was going to make us rich. Ha! Keep dreaming. But if we’re greedy enough it might make us all poor thanks to things like OSS.
Reality is so trippy isn’t it?
If you want a usable open source PCB layout package check out this:
http://bach.ece.jhu.edu/~haceaton/pcb/
it’s a great tool for designing pcbs and its free.
If there’s any bugs, no one will take the responsibility but you.
I agree with post number two by “anon”.
The primary innovation of open source is price, but that is a moot point, really. GNU licence software can be sold at any price you like, and that without a single euro going to the creators (a term shunned by the FSF, I learned today). Similarly, freeware is closed-source but free. As a non-programer, price is more important to me than availability of source code. And I don’t mind paying for software, either. Saves me the trouble of taking up programming. Gives a nice stimulus to the programmers, too.
But to deal with the point of innovation, I see very little of that in the open source world. Open source has so far given us a range of UNIX clones. Great, now students at polytechnics all over the world can run their favourite OS at their homecomputer. But note the word clone. UNIX hasn’t really been a creation of the open source movement. UNIX clones have.
The two applications which have given Linux and its kins so much credibility and end-user viability the last few years, need I even mention their names?
You guessed right, Mozilla and OpenOffice.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t Mozilla the result of Netscape’s (also known as Mozilla Communications) release of the Netscape source code?
And isn’t OpenOffice a development of the commercial StarOffice, whose source was bought and released by SUN?
I seem to recall that being the case. For all the hype surrounding open source and its abilities, the two main applications on desktops around the world, namely web browsing and wordprocessing/spreadsheets have remained unfulfilled by the open source movement for years on end, until commercial powers chose to grant commercially developed technologies to said society-slash-movement.
It speaks a lot about the priorities and organisation of the open source world.
Further “innovations” in the open-source UNIX world has been the development of two Windows clones. About time that UNIX gained a workable desktop environment*, at least if you belong to the fraction believing that UNIX belongs on the desktop. But KDE and Gnome haven’t explored much new ground, only captured that which others previously have explored.
Come to think of it, the FSF even started out by Richard Stallman cloning his favourite editor (though Emacs is on an entirely different scale than its TOPS-20 role model nowadays, be it for better or for worse).
Seen on a big scale, open source hasn’t done more when it comes to imitation than innovation. On the little scale – what do I know. I’d like to hear your recommendations on innovative open-source software. Even if open source might be an innovative concept in itself, that doesn’t mean that its product is innovative.
And** just like communism***, open source isn’t quite so productive. The Eastern bloc cloned PDPs, Z80s and Sinclair Spectrums, and even made some refinements, but was in and by itself not as productive as the first world. Is it improbable that a lone bedroom programmer can create a fully-fledged program with a nice interface in half the time a loosely organised Sourceforger team of bedroom programmers would require? I say not. Adobe Photoshop and M$ Word are one thing, and probably requires at the very least an army of open source developers to be evenly matched, but in the meanwhile, a program such as Paul Nolan’s Photogenics holds its own very well compared to the Gimp. Is it organisation, or the different drive between the types of development which governs this, or is it..? I couldn’t really come up with another alternative there. =)
Glad to hear your opinions.
*(Though I question the tastefulness and use in duplicating Windows, which has hardly served as a good example in interface design.)
**(And I know one shouldn’t start a sentence with “and” 😉
***(I have a strong communist inclination myself, so please don’t take this as a slur)