Results 1 to 16 of 16
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    375

    Open Source vs Commercial Software

    I know this is a general question and probably has been raised a thousand times, but I'm wondering what peoples opinions in general are regarding a *broad comparison of the two*.

    In my opinion it seems that much of the open source software that I've tried although free I have tend to spend so much time working out how it works, or finding that their are strange bugs/quirks or that it doesn't nicely match or interact with other software that I just allways ended up with a commercial variety of the same thing.
    An example of which are the following software, although simple the logic is the same.

    1. I have tried almost all the freeware email clients, and allways found them buggy or lacking in some way, I know use office as it is far superior.
    2. I used a tree pad like application for ages and then settled on a commercial version.
    3. Same with open office, although its ok.. it is not as good as microsoft office.

    So the list goes on.

    Any comments

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    North America
    Posts
    1,229
    Neither is superior or inferior, overall. Software is a tool. You should use whatever tool works best for you, not what works best according to someone else.

    There are pros and cons to every choice. With any software package, you have lots of choices. For example, MS Office is not the only commercial word processor - spreadsheet - mail client package out there. It's the most commercially visible. For many people and many situations, it's the best tool to get their tasks accomplished. I know of many people who use MS Office at their job and come home to Macintosh or Linux boxes with nary a copy of Word installed - or they use Corel's office suite. I know just about as many people who use MS everywhere. And I know about half that many people who use Macs or *nix machines at work and go home to...a Windows setup. It's all about what works best for them, individually.

    I know that I refuse to use Microsoft products whenever there is an alternative available, because 1) I am a little more comfortable fiddling with software than many of my friends and family; 2) I find Microsoft's overall conduct of the past 15 years to be somewhat distasteful, and so I do as little as I can to encourage their behaviour; and 3) I like supporting the small business / open-collaborative-sharing module as much as I possibly can. It's like those who choose to recycle, or choose to not buy certain goods, or choose to eat only organic foods: they have strong personal convictions, and want to support those who share their values and NOT support those who decisively don't. My choices are made by me, for me. I don't have the right to make others' choices for them.

    For whatever reason or series of reasons, you have chosen a certain set of tools. It works for you. That's all that is really necessary. The only reason for you to change tools would be if you had to use a particular tool to exchange data with another person, and they used something else. However, a lot of the software available these days can read many different file formats with little or no problems.
    Lesli Schauf, TLM Network
    Linux and Windows Hosting: Scribehost

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    188
    Lets face it, one of the reasons OS is used so much is that it's basically free to use. That's not to say people want something for nothing but going out and buying the equivalent commercial package is out of reach of some budgets.

    I think you've also got to bear in mind that OS projects are often developed with a purpose and taking it beyond it's original spec is not in the developers to-do list.
    Rob Johnston | LucidUK.com | Rob@LucidUK.com
    Who is Rob? boobear.co.uk
    MSN: msn@luciduk.com | AIM: rob at lucid

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    EU - east side
    Posts
    21,920
    Two major things that I like about OS are: the cost (free) and the idea of a community - people trying to find solutions and helping each other.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    St Louis
    Posts
    4
    Take this as an example:

    You build your website or business on a certain software product. Lets say Foo inc. database. Foo inc folds and no longer supports the product.

    situation A:

    Foo inc has been doing open source development or releases the source when they die. Intrested parties take that code and suit it to their needs (including you )

    situation B:

    Foo inc. takes the code with them and now you are screwed. Security updates? HA!, new features? forget about it!

    Granted it's not like MS is going to fold anytime soon but if you base your business on their technology and they decide it's no longer in their interest ( bottom line ) to support that product your out in the cold. There are other giants out there but they all pale in comparison to the MS beast.

    I don't want to sound like an open source zealot, but I am so

    it's your fate, do what you will.

    --L0stm4n

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    375
    Open source has some fine features. For example is it not a fact that Linux is the worlds most popular server software?

    Its very true about being overly reliant upon another company, but then sometimes we get better service from larger organisation.

    In the UK we have terrible trains, they are allways late, this is because instead of one super company we have got lots of small companies with no proper overall direction and organisation.

    Another point is that larger companies can set industry standards.

    I have a *gut feeling* that probably the best form of open source software is *open source* that is mixed with a commercial bent, such as open office used in sun's star office and linux in *red hat* etc.etc.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    India, US, Germany
    Posts
    1,609
    Hi!
    Open Source = You pay for service , customization etc.
    Commercial = You pay for the software.

    Both are good. You may never in you life modify the code of a software anyway, so why download the source.

    However, I personally prefer open source basically because I am an engineer and work with 100 others so we can always modify the code to our needs.
    Infact even my linux is linuxfromscratch. Opensource has started doing great because now they focus ease of use as well.
    One good example that comes to mind is what kde-look.org did to kde.


    Have a nice day

    Regards
    Amar
    A student once asked his teacher, "Master, what is enlightenment?"
    The master replied, "When hungry, eat. When tired, sleep. When you need care, come to bobcares....
    https://bobcares.in

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    142
    Originally posted by bobcares
    Hi!
    Open Source = You pay for service , customization etc.
    Commercial = You pay for the software.
    It has been my experience that you pay equally for commerical & OSS support. You still need a tech to install that shiny new copy of windows server 2003 you dropped $1000 on and one to install the FreeBSD cd you just downloaded. People like to think that when they pay for software it will give them less problems. And if problems do happen, they can always call up tech support and have them solve the problem. However, OSS has a strong support community and the people responsible for development are available and often contribute to project mailing lists. I think that the community behind OSS is what gives it it's value.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    India, US, Germany
    Posts
    1,609
    I waiting for someone to add
    Commercial = You pay for the software + support :-)

    Amar
    A student once asked his teacher, "Master, what is enlightenment?"
    The master replied, "When hungry, eat. When tired, sleep. When you need care, come to bobcares....
    https://bobcares.in

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    375
    Originally posted by bobcares
    Hi! Opensource has started doing great because now they focus ease of use as well.
    One good example that comes to mind is what kde-look.org did to kde.
    Yes I agree that opensource is focusing on ease of use to some extent. What exactly is the kde-look/kde situation?

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    India, US, Germany
    Posts
    1,609
    kde-look is a place where artists come and put up various icons , color schemes , backgrounds etc for KDE (K Desktop Environment).
    This completely changed the one feels while working on KDE and led to KDE getting even more popular.

    What I was trying to say was that now people have starting understanding the importance of look and feel in any software.


    Regards
    Amar
    A student once asked his teacher, "Master, what is enlightenment?"
    The master replied, "When hungry, eat. When tired, sleep. When you need care, come to bobcares....
    https://bobcares.in

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Kansas City, MO
    Posts
    53
    Originally posted by L0stm4n
    Granted it's not like MS is going to fold anytime soon but if you base your business on their technology and they decide it's no longer in their interest ( bottom line ) to support that product your out in the cold.
    Isn't this what happened with Adobe's GoLive software?
    Take care,
    Brad Birmingham
    http://www.bluevirtual.com

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    375
    There are certainly interesting benfits with regard to open source software, it seems mainly to be focused strongly on linux of course.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    North America
    Posts
    1,229
    One thing I find interesting (which didn't really hit me previously) is that the thread starter seems to be equating open source software with free software.

    I wonder if a more accurate title for your thread, Tanuk, would have been "free software versus commercial software"?
    Lesli Schauf, TLM Network
    Linux and Windows Hosting: Scribehost

  15. #15

    open source

    Good point earlier about open source not being always free. Even if it's free it doesn't mean you should go with it. I would encourage you to try free open source solutions if you can. Then, if it doesn't do the job, move to the commercial open source or closed systems.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    375
    Originally posted by living_media
    One thing I find interesting (which didn't really hit me previously) is that the thread starter seems to be equating open source software with free software.I wonder if a more accurate title for your thread, Tanuk, would have been "free software versus commercial software"?
    Yes, good point living_media. Of course alot of open source software is not free.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •