flat assembler
Message board for the users of flat assembler.

Index > Heap > Everything open source?

Author
Thread Post new topic Reply to topic
Raedwulf



Joined: 13 Jul 2005
Posts: 375
Location: United Kingdom
Raedwulf
Following the "Source code readable?" thread, what if everything was open source?
What would that imply?

And on the other side of the coin, "everything is closed source?"

It would be interesting to hear people's views.

As a starting point of discussion - if everything was open source, programmers/designers would have the benefit of enhancing a global code base, reducing the reinvention of the wheel. Reinventions of the wheel are still possible if the new wheel rolls better!

_________________
Raedwulf
Post 27 Mar 2009, 13:10
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger Reply with quote
DJ Mauretto



Joined: 14 Mar 2007
Posts: 464
Location: Rome,Italy
DJ Mauretto
For me only the specification to be open , i'm not interested to other code
unless to learn example when the spec are little clear Razz

_________________
Nil Volentibus Arduum Razz
Post 27 Mar 2009, 14:11
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Raedwulf



Joined: 13 Jul 2005
Posts: 375
Location: United Kingdom
Raedwulf
Good point there, because many specifications are closed as well.
Post 27 Mar 2009, 18:50
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger Reply with quote
Borsuc



Joined: 29 Dec 2005
Posts: 2466
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Borsuc
Open source FTW!
Post 27 Mar 2009, 20:41
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
buzzkill



Joined: 15 Mar 2009
Posts: 111
Location: the nether lands
buzzkill
I'd be in favor of everything being open source, because I think we -all (future) programmers- would be able to learn quicker and better, and make our software (and ourselves) evolve faster. When you have access to all the information you need, learning something is a lot more enjoyable than when you have to beg, steal or borrow every scrap of information.

And apart from code, I also think it's a good idea to have other sources of information such as experienced programmers, books, forums like these, etc available to exchange experiences and learn from each other. I have a lot of respect for people like Tomasz for example, who create something and share it freely, and are available to answer questions, fix bugs etc.

When I started out with PCs, I didn't have the money to buy software, and open-source didn't exist back then, so all I could do was trade software (on floppies), and hope that someone I knew had the programs I wanted/needed, or source code to learn from, which was even harder to come by. If you compare that with today, where you can freely download and install gigabytes of software, and can find lots of code online and people who are willing to help you learn something, I would say open-source is definitely a Good Thing(tm)...
Post 27 Mar 2009, 21:15
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Raedwulf



Joined: 13 Jul 2005
Posts: 375
Location: United Kingdom
Raedwulf
What about programmer's incomes who's utility-x brings him his main income. And then he makes utility-x opensource or utility-y with equivalent functionality comes about as opensource software. What happens to this programmer?

_________________
Raedwulf
Post 29 Mar 2009, 14:57
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger Reply with quote
revolution
When all else fails, read the source


Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 17278
Location: In your JS exploiting you and your system
revolution
Open source does not necessarily mean no income.

ALL my code is open source to the people that pay for it (the customers) and I leave it up to them to decide if they wish to make it public. There is a very good reason for this and that is because it is security code and it needs to give the user confidence that it hasn't got backdoors. But it does not follow that suddenly there is no more income from those customers. Writing/editing/upgrading code still takes time and effort, if they don't come back to me to make changes then they will have to pay someone else to do it instead. It still costs money to do, but is cheaper to go to the original writer and get a faster more reliable turnaround.

I don't agree with the models like the music industry supports where an artist has one moment of brilliance and expects to makes millions doing nothing for the rest of their lives. The same with coding, once the work is done I think it is only worth the effort that was put into it and no more. Once a builder makes a nice house for you he can't simply sell it again and again, instead, he has to do the work again and again to make a nice houses for everyone else. A fair days pay for a fair days work.
Post 29 Mar 2009, 15:23
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
buzzkill



Joined: 15 Mar 2009
Posts: 111
Location: the nether lands
buzzkill
Like revolution said, open-source doesn't mean you can't earn any money, there are lots of open-source equivalents of closed-source software today, and it's not like all those companies have gone out of business. And take a company like RedHat eg, they're doing quite well (from what I read) and Linux is opensource.

It will probably mean that some companies have to change their business model, because they haven't "evolved" since the time when all software was either very expensive or low-quality freeware. Like the music industry from revolution's example, the software industry has gotten away with unreasonable prices/conditions in the past (and even today). Where I live eg it's very difficult to buy a computer without Windows on it (if you can't build one yourself), and then after they force people to pay for this software (when you can download arguably equivalent SW for free), they have the nerve to try to tell people what they can or can't do with it... ("you haven't really bought this SW, we sold you the right to use it under our terms...") This sort of behavior is IMHO unacceptable (whether it concerns SW or anything else), and I don't think this is the way to maintain a healthy SW industry. (If you've ever seen the prices that businesses have to pay for SW, and the very poor quality work they get for that money... FOSS SW is often not any worse quality-wise).
Post 29 Mar 2009, 18:36
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Raedwulf



Joined: 13 Jul 2005
Posts: 375
Location: United Kingdom
Raedwulf
buzzkill wrote:
It will probably mean that some companies have to change their business model, because they haven't "evolved" since the time when all software was either very expensive or low-quality freeware.


Yea, I was referring to that. I just didn't put it clearly enough.

buzzkill wrote:
Where I live eg it's very difficult to buy a computer without Windows on it (if you can't build one yourself), and then after they force people to pay for this software (when you can download arguably equivalent SW for free), they have the nerve to try to tell people what they can or can't do with it... ("you haven't really bought this SW, we sold you the right to use it under our terms...") This sort of behavior is IMHO unacceptable (whether it concerns SW or anything else), and I don't think this is the way to maintain a healthy SW industry. (If you've ever seen the prices that businesses have to pay for SW, and the very poor quality work they get for that money... FOSS SW is often not any worse quality-wise).


Indeed. Where I used to live, however, it wasn't difficult to buy a non-windows computer, just practically impossible without huge import fees (from other countries). It was also impossible to buy a legal copy of windows Smile.... (without the same restrictions). I used to live in Brunei.
For a welcoming slogan for the country (trying to boost their very sleepy tourist industry), there were banners put up, "Land of Hidden Treasures", I now wonder whether that implied pirates....

_________________
Raedwulf
Post 30 Mar 2009, 05:44
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger Reply with quote
bitRAKE



Joined: 21 Jul 2003
Posts: 2914
Location: [RSP+8*5]
bitRAKE
Putting the primary value in the object produced is lunacy.

No one finds this attractive?

Image

IBM is pimping MS, lol.
(Is that a MAC over his shoulder?)
Post 30 Mar 2009, 16:36
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
rugxulo



Joined: 09 Aug 2005
Posts: 2341
Location: Usono (aka, USA)
rugxulo
bitRAKE wrote:

(Is that a MAC over his shoulder?)


Probably. MS is/was always the biggest 3rd-party developer for Macs, right? Plus they have to get ideas somewhere. Wink
Post 01 Apr 2009, 12:29
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
rugxulo



Joined: 09 Aug 2005
Posts: 2341
Location: Usono (aka, USA)
rugxulo
bitRAKE wrote:

No one finds this attractive?


NO, and I've never felt more heterosexual in my life! Shocked Actually, I wonder which embarasses him more: Vista or this pic. (Puts Mr. Slave to shame.) Laughing
Post 02 Apr 2009, 07:28
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:
Post new topic Reply to topic

Jump to:  


< Last Thread | Next Thread >
Forum Rules:
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Copyright © 1999-2020, Tomasz Grysztar.

Powered by rwasa.