The Benefits and Drawbacks of Open Source
Cathedral Vs. Bazaar
Eric Steven Raymond, a software developer who became impressed with open source software development after watching a few projects take shape, has a famous thesis that compares open source development to running a bazaar, and the traditional, proprietary model to building a cathedral.
As he explains, bazaars are noisy, chaotic places where virtually anyone can came to buy or sell their goods. A cathedral, on the other hand, is the responsibility of a very small group of architects and engineers. Raymond's main idea is that with enough people working with the code, all bugs will be spotted relatively quickly. He was inspired by these insights when he watched the style of Linus Torvald, the founder of the ubiquitous Linux operating system, in action.
Even enthusiastic open source supporters will readily admit that open source is not the final chapter in the history of software development. Raymond himself writes that although the bazaar style is perfect for making even the most basic program better, it's almost impossible to start an idea from absolute scratch. That's why open source will probably change the rules of the software game, but won’t make traditional software vendors obsolete anytime soon.
The bazaar might be as old as recorded history, but measured by the span of time people have been doing business, open source software is still very young. The relative youth of the movement translates into both advantages and disadvantages for the end user.
Advantages of Open Source
Lightweight: Open source programs might see a lot of people working on them, but aren’t “created by committee.?The blueprint for proprietary software usually needs the signoff of many different departments, and each department probably has a requirement that isn’t necessarily good for the end user.
Open source programs have the luxury of being as lean and mean as possible, and then giving users who want more functionality the opportunity to download and add what are usually called “extensions.?In a proprietary world, vendors have to give consumers anything they could ever want in one package. This means most users don’t use most of the features, while a few users use all of the features. So, everyone gets a bloated program for the satisfaction of a few people.
Easier Purchase: For the vast majority of open source software packages, it's not necessary to go to the store. All that's needed is an Internet connection and anyone can download their software on the spot. The “torrent?model, where a small chunk of the program is distributed on many sites at once, is less bandwidth intensive and has become a favorite with open source distributions.
Little or No Marketing: Open source software is all substance (though might fall short on style). Whereas proprietary software companies are often engaged in intense public relations and marketing battles, open source software tends to have a survival of the fittest mentality. The marketing that software companies engage in is not free—ultimately, the consumer pays for marketing, packaging, shipping, and all the other things that aren’t part of an open source program.
Customizable: The authors of open source software encourage people to make it better, build extensions, and modify programs to fit the needs of the end user. Someone can download an open source CRM or contact management program and tweak it to fit the exact needs of their sales force.
Disadvantages of Open Source
Little or No Instruction: Anyone who has decided that it in the long run it was easier and cheaper to use an open source solution vs. a proprietary one has probably learned their program the hard way. Proprietary software vendors invest a lot of money into usability studies, interface design, and written and video tutorials. One of the problems with open source is that even though a description of the program will say “easy to use?it's probably not as easy as a more expensive, proprietary version would be.
There are two reasons for this. One, because so many developers are involved in open source development most of the manuals for a program are written for people with a lot more technical savvy than an average person. Two, because most open source projects are so young and evolve so quickly, and because it's hard to document a software project that's not finished yet, writers, volunteer or paid, are always playing catch-up with the latest release of a particular open source distribution.
Not intuitive: Related to the less-than-helpful manuals, the interface for some open source programs are not intuitive. Proprietary software has to be welcoming to almost anyone; if someone gives up in frustration they will likely return their purchase. If a program is difficult to use, it will directly impact a company's bottom line.
Open source programs, on the other hand, are often more concerned with the output of a program, not how to create that output. So, although an open source Content Management System for building a website has ten times the usefulness to a webmaster that a proprietary one has, learning how to use all these features can be a lesson in frustration.
Time is Money: Even if a program is free, if a company wants to customize it they’ll have to pay developers. In some cases, especially for complex, highly evolved software packages, buying a proprietary “plug and play?solution is in the long run cheaper than paying developers to get a free version just right.
Sharing: Though not the fault of open source software, many mission critical business applications don’t work in an open source environment. For example, the department charged with producing employee newsletters and videos will be at a real loss if their company switched to an open source environment. There are decent open source video editors, but the industry standards for video editing, photo editing, and publication design are at this point available only for the Macintosh or Windows operating systems.
Bottom Line
The good news is that open source's drawbacks are likely to fall away as it matures. Documentation will get better and there will be more and more business-friendly programs every year.
The bad news, depending on your perspective, is that proprietary software already has a big head start. The old saying that old age and wisdom (or treachery, depending on the version you choose to subscribe to) will always beat out youth and enthusiasm probably has some merit here. Never underestimate the power of the free market, and the fact that smart software companies will embrace the best of open source and make it their own.
|
