Thread: Open Source or not

>>This way, they can sell it initially and make the proffit that they want so much, and then a bit later it becomes open source and we can learn from what they did....I like that policy.

i agree, you have to make some money on your investment...you do have bills to pay

i think valve has a similar policy, half-life is open source now

Everything completely open source is not a good idea because the more code there is accessible, the more people will use it and evolve it without coming up with solutions on their own.

That's what's good about being closed source. It's more competative -- other people see what your code does, but not how it does it, and they try to imitate it in their own way. The world gets many completely different solutions to the same problem, each with its own strengths and weaknesses.

I always find that people who think everything should be open source are the people who just copy and past code and can't pogram themselves

Sure, open source is great, but not for everything.

Open source appears to just be a new bandwagon fad...I don't mind showing people my code to stupid projects, helping people with their own by seeing a part of mine, but if I ever plan on making money with my work I'll be damned if I give out the whole thing. I'd probably work on the same basis as ID games. No doubt I'd show small bits of code not too far after release, but nothing mission critical.

Of course, that assumes I ever sell my own software.

I don't completely oppose open-source. I oppose the hive dillusion that so many fad-OSourcers appear to have, which is "All software should be completely open. The knowledge belongs to everyone" - wtf? Shut the hell up and get a job, you pinko-commie hippie bastard.

Let's say I write some code that can calculate numbers so precisely so fast, that it would blow your mind. Should I release it to everyone? Screw that. Sell to the US government. They'd kill to have it. Or maybe they actually WOULD kill to have it, and that'd be a BAD idea...either way, you get my point, whatever that is.

I don't know if this has been said but:

Free like free speech, not free beer.

I agree with some people on here, Id's policy rocks. Also, not everything should be open-source, such as games, I'm willing to pay for a game if it's good, but if it's good, a policy like Id's is a good idea.

I think open source is great not because of not having to pay, you can change it any way that you want, the OS is truly yours, you get to be educated and the products are updated more frequently then closed source ones.

All of the diffrent *nux distros are all built from the same thing, but you can have it any way you want, easy, networking, GUI's... you name it. The problem with, example MS is that they usually have a networking one, and an easy one, you can't change everything to you liking, or just tinker with it for fun. Your are at the bidding of the company to fix problems, with open source, YOU can fix it.

Maybe you have weird preferences and you want to have your OS be able to do certain things, you can do it, you don't have to wait for a company to do it, even IF they are going to do it.

Oh well, sorry for the long post.

>>The knowledge belongs to everyone" - wtf? Shut the hell up and get a job, you pinko-commie hippie bastard.

i agree w/this, knowledge does belong to everyone, but its none of your damned business how i rendered my models bioooootch. i wouldnt mind a few years after i released my game/software/driver etc. showing code but not right off the bat.....