I have been thinking about the whole open source versus commercial software and realized that at their heart both offer the same thing : freedom!
The whole argument actually goes back to economics or rather formulation of economies: the concept of "gift economy" versus "money economy". Money economy promises freedom from patronage and privilege - "Any body can buy it as long as they have the money". On the other hand, Gift economy promises freedom to those, who for some reason cannot or do not wish to participate in the money economy.
In practice, a healthy mix is needed. It is no different from public and private mix required in business or providing mobility in a city. Consider a city where there is no public transportation, only form of mobility offered is through personal vehicles. You can already start guessing the mix of people who will live in that city. A typical modern suburbia.
On the other hand, a city where public transportation is the only means of mobility, chances are people will get stranded when the system breaks down, such as when operators or employees go on strikes. While the comparison is not entirely valid, many open-source projects are like "Soup nazi" kitchens, where your influence rests on your personal relationship with the committer. However, for a lot of customers with less than adequate money, it offers the ability to deploy technology within their budgets.
As for me, I would like to have the ability to switch a commercial stack with an open-source one, and vice-versa, based on the needs of the client. That is a luxury, however, that I can only dream about....
The whole argument actually goes back to economics or rather formulation of economies: the concept of "gift economy" versus "money economy". Money economy promises freedom from patronage and privilege - "Any body can buy it as long as they have the money". On the other hand, Gift economy promises freedom to those, who for some reason cannot or do not wish to participate in the money economy.
In practice, a healthy mix is needed. It is no different from public and private mix required in business or providing mobility in a city. Consider a city where there is no public transportation, only form of mobility offered is through personal vehicles. You can already start guessing the mix of people who will live in that city. A typical modern suburbia.
On the other hand, a city where public transportation is the only means of mobility, chances are people will get stranded when the system breaks down, such as when operators or employees go on strikes. While the comparison is not entirely valid, many open-source projects are like "Soup nazi" kitchens, where your influence rests on your personal relationship with the committer. However, for a lot of customers with less than adequate money, it offers the ability to deploy technology within their budgets.
As for me, I would like to have the ability to switch a commercial stack with an open-source one, and vice-versa, based on the needs of the client. That is a luxury, however, that I can only dream about....
1 comment:
You write very well.
Post a Comment