My article on open-source analogies resulted in a rather interesting email exchange with Eric Raymond and Richard Stallman.
As should be apparent to readers of ZDNet Talkback forums, I enjoy a good debate. My vision of the ideal forum would be a café table where people discuss controversial issues in an environment where disagreement doesn't imply your opponent is Satan's house cleaner. Richard Stallman seemed willing to play along. Eric Raymond, on the other hand, was the guy at the table trying to take out his opponent's eye with a fork.
Eric recommended that I read The Magic Cauldron, his seminal work on the economics of open source. Though I'd read it before, I did so a long time ago, and certainly not with an eye towards building a response. In truth, this is partly a response and partly a parallel defence of proprietary software that is informed by points made in "The Magic Cauldron".
This instalment presents some foundation theory which details the role played by proprietary software companies in the software economy. Part two begins the rebuttal phase of this series, dealing with the comparative advantages of open source and proprietary software. Part three deals with Raymond's five reasons to choose open source. Part four discusses issues related to developer compensation.
Preamble: Open Source IS Good
I LIKE open source, and think that open-source software is an important component of a modern software economy.
Source code access is a tremendous way to ensure the spread of a particular technology. The right to copy binaries (compiled source code) serves a similar function. Source code access is indispensable in cases where customised variants are required (embedded software is a good example). Source code is conducive to community development, creating a realm within which development load can be borne by many participants.
My difference with people like Richard Stallman is not that I see no value in "free software" (that is, software for which the source code is available, and the right to copy is guaranteed, among other things), but that I think there are benefits to proprietary business models that can outweigh the social costs of charging access to "secrets" in your software. My difference with Eric Raymond, who does see a role for proprietary software, is a question of degree. I believe the benefits to be derived from proprietary software are greater than he does, and that it should constitute a greater share of the market than the 5 percent he proposed in our email exchange.






Talkback
Why you even bother to reply to such idiots as Stallman and Raymond remains to be seen...
Because they influence lots of people, and they aren't idiots.
Poking Small Holes In Your Argument...
"Unless you chose Linux, FreeBSD, or another open-source operating system, you would likely build your application atop some proprietary platform."
Interesting -- given tthat your own site is running on an Apache/Linux combination... in fact, if I *were* to write a cutomized billing program, using a free OS would be a definite plus - why pay the expense of a proprietary OS when I can split the difference between me and my customer? As to databases, using an open source database (MySQL does not count by the way, as they charge for commercial use), PostgreSQL is a perfectly fine alternative.
Your "Open Source Developers are all Ramanujans" argument is particularly weak and ingores a basic moving source of Open Source, which is to "scratch an itch". Software is not just for flights of fancy, and Open Source programmers are not dreamy theoreticians.
As to customers, how much closer can you get to the customer when you are both the programmer *and* the user for the software you are using? See the evidence of this in popular software tools (GNU, perl, PHP, Apache, Linux) that shape the internet .
The fact is, software