IPI Report: Why Open Source Can't Meet Mass Market Demands

releases.usnewswire.com ^

[Dominic Harr]

What exactly would be the purpose of developing open source solutions in this market?

Um -- wasn't Doom open-source?

That's like what, the technical grandfather for 2/3rds of the gaming industry? All first-person shooters and many, many 3d Virtual World games from sports to puzzle games?

And civilization was originally open-source. Civ clones are like another what, 1/3rd of the market?

Open-source and proprietary dev are two sides of the same coin, the work hand-in-fist together. MS and friends are so, so clueless. They want to control *all* development so badly they even consider hobbyist developers a threat.

Now that is big brother, at it's finest.

[Dimensio]

Um -- wasn't Doom open-source?

Nope. Doom IS open-source now, but it wasn't when it was first released.

I'm not so sure that having it open source at the time of its release would have been of significant benefit anyway. I do think that some specifications were made open, so that people could design their own map editors, but I don't believe that the entire source was opened up until well after the game's release.

Quake II was released under the GPL, though I'm not sure if it was GPLed right away, or if that was done later.

[Dominic Harr]

Doom IS open-source now, but it wasn't when it was first released.

Ah, thanks, couldn't remember. And Quake, too. And Civ, originally.

Just as I suspected, the article is clearly 100% correct, open-source has no room in gaming. :-D

[Bush2000]

And some of the most popular games only run on boxes that can only be used for games -- to the regret of MS.

Not at all. Some of those "most popular games" run on XBox... ;-p

[Bush2000]

Ah, thanks, couldn't remember. And Quake, too. And Civ, originally. Just as I suspected, the article is clearly 100% correct, open-source has no room in gaming. :-D

You just don't get it, Harr. Games development requires big bucks. Open source cheapskates can't sink those kinds of dollars into building games; hence, the only games that are open-sourced are those which are well beyond their prime.

[dfwgator]

Y'know, back in the old days, when everybody was a computer novice, people had to install DOS and install Windows manually

Back in my day we didn't have all these "fancy schmanzy" operating systems. When you wanted an OS we had to code it yourself in 0s and 1s on Hollerith cards...and we liked it...we loved it. </grumpy old man rant>

[paulk]

Open source is expert friendly, but it's not novice friendly

Times have changed - my 80 year old father uses Linux with out any problems.

[discostu]

The computer industry is old now, 80 year-olds aren't necessarily out of the loop.

[TheEngineer]

Just once it would be nice to see a real independent study. Clearly, this one does not meet that criteria.

Knott initially came to the District in 1984, after serving as Armey's manager for his first congressional race. He is a graduate of Auburn University, and has been involved with the Fund for American Studies, the Leadership Institute and the Institute for Policy Innovation.

So Microsoft hired a conservative guy (back in 1998!) who used to work for Dick Armey (and was also involved with IPI -- an org that Dick Armey founded in 1987)... and that's supposed to mean that IPI is biased in Microsoft's favor???

LOL!

Maybe if it was the other way around (IPI hiring an ex-Microsoft exec to write pro-MS articles), I'd see your point.

Show me the money! Otherwise, you've shown zilch.

[adam_az]

You deliberately responded to me via someone elses post, not my post #9

heres a better explanation

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/business/longterm/microsoft/stories/1999/microsoft101599.htm

"The same day, Microsoft lobbyist Kerry Knott, former chief of staff to House Majority Leader Richard K. Armey (R-Tex.), met with Rep. Dan Miller (R-Fla.), urging him to press for the lower funding level in negotiations with the Senate."

IPI staffers double as Microsoft lobbyists, and you still pretend that IPI is "independent?"

I can't show you the money until you take off your blinders.

[TheEngineer]

IPI staffers double as Microsoft lobbyists, and you still pretend that IPI is "independent?"

Your article is dated 1999. Knott quit Armey/IPI for a job at Microsoft in 1998. Check out IPI's website. Knott isn't listed on their personnel page.

You deliberately responded to me via someone elses post, not my post #9

Well, you were both making the same point about Knott... but if a consolidated post offends your sensitivities, then I'll type separate posts next time.

Also, IPI's position in this article and your reference match its self-described mission statement:

About the Institute for Policy Innovation

The Institute for Policy Innovation (IPI) is a non-profit, non-partisan public policy "think tank" based in Lewisville, Texas and founded in 1987 by Congressman Dick Armey to research, develop and promote innovative and non-partisan solutions to today's public policy problems.

IPI's focus is on approaches to governing that harness the strengths of individual liberty, limited government, and free markets. IPI emphasizes getting its studies into the hands of the press and policy makers so that the ideas they contain can be applied to the challenges facing us today.

IPI is engaged in an extensive publication program of policy studies, issue briefs, newsletters and books on public policy issues, all of which are available in electronic form at this site.

Today IPI's work concentrates on such issues as taxation and government spending, economic growth initiatives, and government regulation. Current areas of focus include tax cuts and tax reform, intellectual property, Internet taxes and regulation, pharmaceutical issues, Social Security privatization, and educational choice. We pursue these areas through our IPI Center for Tax Analysis, our IPI Center for Economic Growth, our IPI Center for Technology Freedom, and our IPI Center for Education Freedom.

Though IPI is a non-partisan organization, we approach policy issues from a consistent philosophical viewpoint of individual liberty and responsibility, free markets, and limited government.

IPI is a public foundation, supported wholly by contributions from individuals, businesses, and other non-profit foundations. In order to maintain its independence, IPI neither solicits nor accepts contributions from any government agency.