Posted on 06/26/2013 10:01:41 AM PDT by ShadowAce
/johnny
That’s interesting—at our site, we run both Windows and Linux. The Linux (and FOSS) side of the datacenters are all much more stable and robust than the Windows side.
Has not been my experience for the most part.
It’s an interesting topic. I won’t get into the urinating contest except to say that anyone in the industry knows how much open source software is in use, and I could care less what they think about it.
The point of the article was the ethics of using FOSS without contributing to development, or in what ways they contribute. For example, I have developed hardware that runs with open source software to create a complete solution. The way I see it, I am helping expand awareness and pulling more potential developers in, and thus this form of contribution benefits the software developers as well. However, I get paid for the hardware, while their software is given away for free...and it’s fair to question the equity of that.
Another aspect of contributing, are users who provide suggesting, feature lists, bug reports, etc. considered as “contributing” or merely whining and complaining? Most for-profit companies treasure this “voice of the customer” input highly, but some FOSS developers consider it more of the latter, and instead pursue their own interests and development plans.
It’s an interesting model, and putting altruism and ego aside, there’s got to be a way to reward those who “make” by those who “use”. At the least, a balance should be struck between the demands of users and the desires of developers.
You must have a LOT of fingers.
MP3, Windows, Mac, Linux, internet, tablets, smartphones, GPS, 3-D printing, etc. etc. etc. Do you have a round tire? That sure seems like "open source stuff embedded in our applications."
Open source software is just another production model. If it produces the best code for the best value, that code should be used. Competition includes the voluntary production of products by means that are considered radical.
Like, maybe, when developers feel like it is no longer worth their time they either stop development or they start charging for their work? If the developers want to ignore the freeloaders and follow their own development plan, that might lead us to something better . . . or worse . . . or a fork leading to even more consumer choice.
Concerning your example, what did the developers of the software get in return for their work? They definitely got something. If they hadn't, they wouldn't have built it in the first place. If you feel guilty and feel you need to contribute financially, I'm sure you could approach the community to see what they suggest.
ISTM that a balance is struck in the marketplace and the external imposition of a "more fair" means of striking that balance is a very bad idea.
if its given away there is no such thing as freeloading
That’s just the custom forum software. FR uses open source web server software (NGINX now I believe, though I think it used to be Apache, also open source).
I think you might be right, at least until people remember what being people was all about.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.