Open source is dying
This week, we're looking at how data can be used to support or debunk assertions or statements of future implications.
Let's do a practice run together.
Over the last few years, I've lamented that open source is being overtaken by proprietary software that is free-of-cost, but not free in terms of ownership by end users. As a result, Google, Ning, and Facebook have taken the buzz out of Wordpress, Drupal, and other open source software. I've stated as well (somewhat for the sake of antagonism, but partly to give voice to a personal fear) that "open source is dying".
Your mission, should you choose to engage, is to a) shape the topic of this debate through your comments and reaction, b) state your view of the topic, c) find data that supports your assertion (for or against the "open source is dying" statement).
4 comments so far:
ekendriss says: Open Source (is not dying) Map
I submit this as item 1 in favor of Open Source not dying. Of course, it is just a snapshot, and based on my first glance not obvious exactly when this snapshot was taken. Still, it paints a picture of firm existence of open source.
http://www.redhat.com/about/where-is-open-source/activity/
http://flowingdata.com/2009/04/30/is-your-country-involved-in-open-source/
bonstewart says: open source data
one of the challenges for me, regarding part c) of this question, is that i'm hesitant to just grab some numbers from Google and call them data, but i'm still struggling to get a clear enough handle on my/our premises in this discussion to create a clearer analytic structure.
leaving data aside for the moment, my assumptions are that open source software pushed the envelope of user expectation to a place where the proprietary companies had to go free to compete. since, at the same time, the second wave of adopters (who are neither programmers nor ideological) took up the software en masse without necessarily understanding the difference between free and open source, the two ideas have been conflated. thus the impetus that open source once had in terms of broad appeal gets lost in a sea of free applications, its distinction a mere detail to the majority of users.
in other words, open source may appear dead because even the people using it may not understand what it really means. this could be because it succeeded to the limits of its capacity, or because it's been reabsorbed into the corporate model it was attempting to undermine.
my own view is that if open source dies we - culturally - lose something valuable. i say this in spite of the fact that i'm one of those second wave adopters who can no more code than fly. still, i believe that societies tend to absorb/model the premises of the technologies they operate on, and the concept of non-proprietary code strikes me as an important analogue (no pun intended) or model for 21st century society, particularly when contrasted against the "give it all over to Google & hope for benevolent dictatorship" alternative.
i'm partially exaggerating. but only partially. that's my a) & b) on the topic.
Dolors says: Mozilla joins Google in an Open Source project
Mozilla announced that joins Google in WebM project, whose aim is to proceed in the video for the web (maximizing performance, ease of use and capabilities, ...) with the launch of the VP8 codec (open source and free of patents).
_____
Source: Mozilla Blog
Dolors says: .
The open source is dying?
All movements have growth curves (ups and downs in its development), but, undoubtedly, open source has produced a mirror effect in the educational field, resulting in a new way to share information. Examples are the OER and the Open Education.