I've been thinking about open-source
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13

Thread: I've been thinking about open-source

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Posts
    127

    I've been thinking about open-source

    I've been thinking about this open-source thing. I've been thinking about how it will affect us in the future and how its affecting us now. Open-source is a great thing in my opinion. It looks like it will make the future even better also. Iím thinking, if all goes well, this could be a good step towards a better world. The basic concept of it is helping each other out to make things better, without pay. It also is making programs cheaper if not free, which in turn makes people happier by saving money. If open-source works out right, there really wouldn't be a problem with copyright infringement and piracy. It could be a great step to get the human race into a helpful, non-greedy society, willing to help each other to better ourselves without worrying if we can afford it or not. Well this is my two cents. What do you all think?
    The only four things i need are food, water, a computer, and the internet.

  2. #2
    Well yeah but what are the chances...really... how much money is being made that will cease if everything is open source. i agree with you donnt get me wrong but i just dont think it can happen.
    THEprophetMOSES

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    163
    can't they get money other ways?
    open source has soooooooooo many benifits!

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    118
    I think you make confusion between OpenSource and Free Software.

    You can sell Open Sources software, you just "give" the sources with the exe but the copyright can tell you to not give the sources to the public. For example some firm have the sources of Windows but they can't give them to everybody.

    With the Free software you have 4 rules: Free to use the program, Free to distribute, Free to have the sources and Free to modified the sources. For me the second rule (Free to distribute) make the software with no fee. Image a firm that sell a free software, I bought it and with the rule I give the sources to everyone. So to gain money with the Free Software you have to make services like installation, hot line, ... .

    The 2 principle have their adept. If you are a commercial firm that make software I think you will sell Open Source (you can have money directly with the software) and if you make software for fun I think you will use the Free software.

    The main problem, for me, with the free software is that you can't have money if you make ONLY the software and have no annex services.

    But that's only my opinion may be I'm wrong so if someone have a different point of view.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    502
    Ghostdog: I have no idea what you're talking about...
    Bleh.

  6. #6
    The Doctor Und3ertak3r's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    2,743
    Open source is a wonderful concept..

    here is an O/S.. We all work on it to make it better.. untill it is the best bar none..
    Companies who wish to offer support to end users will sell it under their trade name..with a few of ther own customisations.. but with the source code available to improve it further..

    That is a glossy example.. now for the But..

    The real winners (Financially) will not be you and I, it will not be the Mandrake's or the Red Hat's. It Will be the Multi National companies, the Sony's and the Philip's..
    These guys are standing back and rubbing their hands with glee.. why? How much are they paying to M$ now for the distribution of hardware etc with M$ code in it? And how much will they pay you or I for patching a security hole in there next Laptop, or an improvement in their TCP/IP implementation? SFA !
    can't they get money other ways?
    not to pick on you Drew..
    Yes many companies can make their mony other ways.. but as it is at the moment Free don't pay the elctricity bill.. but free isn't what Open source is about.. But it seems what many see it as.. these companies don't live on weekly deliverys by Brinks with fresh cash from the nations Mint..
    Open source is many minds working together toward a common goal in software development.
    Not the "Code is mine, mine, ALL Mine, and Pox on you if you get your hands on it" of certain companies today..
    M$ may fade into the background.. But another will take it's place.. Perhaps IBM will get their dreams and return to the monopoly it once was.. And then will it be so Open.. It wasn't so some years ago..
    Open Source is a Utopia.. It will seem to become mainstream.. but never quite.. The products will anthey will make someone /company very wealthy.. but they won't be Open source anymore.. and new products will startout in the open source.. and the cycle restarts..
    ..

    I hope my rammblings amake sence

    cheers.. i'm off to bed
    "Consumer technology now exceeds the average persons ability to comprehend how to use it..give up hope of them being able to understand how it works." - Me http://www.cybercrypt.co.nr

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    118
    Und3ertak3r, Mandrake and RH make Free Software not Open Source.

    You can find an article : "Whence the Source: Untangling the Open Source/Free Software Debate" at http://opensource.oreilly.com/news/scoville_0399.html

    for Sick Dwarf and others, you can find an article of Richard Stallman (the father of Free Software) which explain "Why ''Free Software'' is better than ''Open Source'' " at http://www.openresources.com/documen...ter/index.html

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Posts
    127
    Und3ertak3r, you are right. But still though, couldn't this possibly reduce the prices of computers and stuff, cuz now all your paying for is the hardware, not the OS which usually costs 200 bucks. That 200 you can save to put into other things like adding more ram and stuff. Hell, id rather spend money upgrading the parts of my computer then for my OS or other tools out there wich i could get cheaper or free.
    My original view was that this is a great thing to make the world a better place, people are helping people to better their software without pay. To me, thats is why im into computers and programming. I share my knowledge with those who dont know what i know, without pay. I would work all the time for free if i didn't have to pay for things necessary to live. Who knows, maybe (really big maybe) this could be one of the first steps to getting people together without greed. Maybe this could lead to a freedom from greed that many people suffer from. Maybe this could turn the world into a place that everyone would want to live in.
    The only four things i need are food, water, a computer, and the internet.

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    65
    In theory, not having to pay for an OS seems fine. I don't know many 'average' (stupid) users who would give up windows for an operating system that takes effort to use, even if the benefits outweigh the disadvantages. Don't get me wrong, I am in full support of open source software and operating systems, but they will never become mainstream until they become as easy to use as windows--mandrake is getting there--and run common, industry standard software.
    Have you filled out an ID-10-T or PEBKAK form lately?

  10. #10
    OK so if microsoft decides to have all of their stuff open source they wouldnt make all the money they get from upgrades and fixes because of their crappy work. if the open source makes the os better and with no bugs, (1) Microsoft has no bugs to make patches for, (2) while it still has bugs you would be able to get the patches from other places... what then a substantial chunk out of m$ revenue...

    Correct me if im wrong...
    THEprophetMOSES

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •