Open Source Web Development
Open Source Web Development
Open Source Development
Open Source Software / Free Software (OSS/FS) has risen to great prominence. Briefly, OSS/FS programs are programs whose licenses give users the freedom to run the program for any purpose, to study and modify the program, and to redistribute copies of either the original or modified program (without having to pay royalties to previous developers).
This goal of this paper is to show that you should consider using OSS/FS when you're looking for software, based on quantitative measures. Some sites provide a few anecdotes on why you should use OSS/FS, but for many that's not enough information to justify using OSS/FS. Instead, this paper emphasizes quantitative measures (such as experiments and market studies) on why using OSS/FS products is, in many circumstances, a reasonable or even superior approach. I should note that while I find much to like about OSS/FS, I'm not a rabid advocate; I use both proprietary and OSS/FS products myself. Vendors of proprietary products often work hard to find numbers to support their claims; this page provides a useful antidote of hard figures to aid in comparing proprietary products to OSS/FS.
Note that this paper's goal is not to show that all OSS/FS is better than all proprietary software. Certainly, there are many who believe this is true from ethical, moral, or social grounds. However, no numbers could prove such broad statements. Instead, I'll simply compare commonly-used OSS/FS software with commonly-used proprietary software, to show that at least in certain situations and by certain measures, some OSS/FS software is at least as good or better than its proprietary competition. Of course, some OSS/FS software is technically poor, just as some proprietary software is technically poor, and even very good software may not fit your specific needs. But although most people understand the need to compare proprietary products before using them, many people fail to even consider OSS/FS products. This paper is intended to explain why acquirers should consider OSS/FS alternatives. This paper doesn't examine transition approaches, but it's worth noting that organizations can transition to OSS/FS in part or in stages, which for many is a more practical transition approach.
I'll emphasize the operating system (OS) known as GNU/Linux (which many abbreviate as Linux) and the Apache web server, since these are some of the most visible OSS/FS projects. I'll also primarily compare OSS/FS software to Microsoft's products (such as Windows and IIS), since Windows has a significant market share and Microsoft is one of proprietary software's strongest proponents. I'll mention Unix systems in passing as well, though the situation with Unix is more complex; today's Unix systems include many OSS/FS components or software primarily derived from OSS/FS components. Thus, comparing proprietary Unix systems to OSS/FS systems (when examined as whole systems) is often not as clear-cut. I use the term Unix-like to mean systems intentionally similar to Unix; both Unix and GNU/Linux are Unix-like systems. The most recent Apple Macintosh OS (MacOS OS X) presents the same kind of complications; older versions of MacOS were wholly proprietary, but Apple's OS has been redesigned so that it's now based on a Unix system with substantial contributions from OSS/FS programs. Indeed, Apple is now openly encouraging collaboration with OSS/FS developers. I include data over a series of years, not just the past year; all relevant data should be considered when making a decision, instead of arbitrarily ignoring older data, and the older data shows that OSS/FS has a history of many positive traits.
You can get a more detailed explanation of the terms open source software and Free Software, as well as related information, from the appendix and my list of Open Source Software / Free Software (OSS/FS) references at http://www.dwheeler.com/oss_fs_refs.html. Note that those who use the term open source software tend to emphasize technical advantages of such software (such as better reliability and security), while those who use the term Free Software tend to emphasize freedom from control by another and/or ethical issues. The opposite of OSS/FS is closed or proprietary software. Software for which the source code that can be viewed, but cannot modified and redistributed without further limitation (e.g., source viewable or open box software, including shared source and community licenses), are not considered here since they don't meet the definition of OSS/FS. Many OSS/FS programs are commercial programs, so don't make the mistake of thinking OSS/FS is equivalent to non-commercial software (indeed, any article making this mistake should be ignored since it is obviously poorly researched). Almost no OSS/FS programs are in the public domain (which has a specific legal meaning), so avoid that term as well. Other alternative terms for OSS/FS software include libre software (where libre means free as in freedom), free-libre and open-source software (FLOS software or FLOSS), open source / Free Software (OS/FS), free / open source software (FOSS), open-source software (indeed, open-source is often used as a general adjective), freed software, and even public service software (since often these software projects are designed to serve the public at large). OSS/FS is not freewareâ; freeware is usually defined as proprietary software given away without cost, and does not provide any right to examine, modify, or redistribute the source code. The most popular OSS/FS license is the General Public License (GPL); all software released under the GPL is OSS/FS, but not all OSS/FS software uses the GPL; nevertheless, some people do inaccurately use the term GPL software when they mean OSS/FS software.
Call PageTrends today to web-enable your database, or learn more about the unexpected ways databases can bring your site to life.
To have a no obligation IT assessment created for your business concept, feel free to fill out our form.