In open source the source code is freely and openly available for everyone to view, edit and use, within a limited-rights licence. For example: FireFox and Linux. In the closed source, commercial model, source code remains confidential and must be bought by the end user. For example, the average user cannot access the source code for Windows Internet Explorer; only the in-house software developers are allowed access. The business model for open source software is to provide services to the commmunity, where as closed source's aim is to sell a finished product. The success of open source hinges on the active contribution and interest of users. In contrast, the motivations for the success of closed source production is the fiscal benefit to the commercial production team.
Open source is an example of produsage. Axel Bruns has idenitified three fundamental principles that define the term produsage:
1. Open participation and communal evaluation. Open source software is an example of this because the project is open for anybody to make contributions and evaluate and test its usability, a key feature of web 2.0. The software is continually updated through collaborative participation and new updates are available almost everyday (Bruns, 2008, p42). In contrast, closed source epitomises web 1.0 where users had no ability to contribute to software development. The availability of new closed source software is stagnant and relies on set release dates for 'new editions'.
2. Fluid Heterarchy, ad hoc meritocracy. In open source contributors grow in the community through their esteem and influence on the project. There is no set dictator for the duration of the project. Leaders are fluid and ever changing according to their abilities and the merit of their contributions. In closed source the production development team is subject to traditional hierarchical structures. There is an appointed leader for the duration of the project and each employee has set individual tasks to complete.
3. Unfinished artefacts, continuing process. In open source the project is always under development, continually evolving with no set end date. Whereas commercial production aims at delivering a complete package to meet a set deadline.
By Emma, Ella and Nat.
Reference
Bruns, A. 2008. Open Source Software Development: Probabilistic Eyeballs in Bruns, A. Blogs, Wikipedia, Second Life, and Beyond: From Production to Produsage, New York: Peter Lang, pp.37-68.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
The “How is open source software different from commercial production?” entry successfully and concisely addresses this proposed question. I found the entry engaging and informative through its systematic analysis of open source and closed source software development. By contrasting these alternative software business models, the entry clearly outlines to the reader their corresponding strengths and weaknesses. I feel this provided a coherent foundation for further exploration into open source software, utilizing Bruns’ theory of “produsage”, which offered the reader further insight into this area. Also, utilizing Bruns’ academic article “Open Source Software Development: Probabilistic Eyeballs” as a reference heightens the credibility of the information presented in the entry.
To further enhance the readers’ understanding of this topic, additional information could be included at the beginning of the entry. For example, an updated entry could include the history of open source. Godfrey and Tu (2000, 2) state “although the term ‘open source’ is relatively recent, the fundamental ideas behind it are not”. The history of open source is closely tied to the history of the hacker culture since it is largely hackers who have sustained this movement. As Bretthauer (2001, 5) discusses in the article, Open Source Software: A History, “hacker is used here in the sense of one who is both a skilled professional programmer and a passionate hobbyist wishing to advance computer science, rather than the definition recently used by the popular press of a destructive system cracker.” Providing a historical framework could increase the readers’ understanding of the concept of open source software. Overall, I found this entry to be engaging and informative, helping me to further understand open source software.
References:
Godfrey, M and Tu, Q. 2000. Evolution in Open Source Software: A Case Study. http://bat8.inria.fr/~lang/reperes/local/icsm00.pdf (accessed May 2, 2008)
Bretthauer, D. 2001. Open Source Software: A History. http://digitalcommons.uconn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1009&context=libr_pubs (accessed May 3, 2008)
FOR REFERENCE:
Comments left by other users on our post on Nat's Blog...
Mark on May 1, 2008 7:40 PM said:
Good introduction and explanation of what open source is. Particularly liked the examples of the open source softwares out there. Maybe you could talk about what exactly makes them open source? Are there any differences between them and what are their non-open source counterparts?
Another point of interest I’d like raised to be addressed would be the question of why exactly these people participate or contribute to open source software. Is it altruistic? Are there any alterior motives?
Another interesting thing that the concept of open source raises, is where do the boundaries stop? Is it confided to on-line only? I’m referring to the movie ‘snakes on a plane’ where the filmmakers relied on feedback from the public and script and scenes were made by the public. As a result the movie was made by and for the public. Giving them exactly what they wanted.
.:: k :: (see http://interactivityisall.blogspot.com/) on May 2, 2008 8:20 PM said:
This article gave a detailed insight into the differences between open source software and commercial software. I was particularly interested in the discussion of the differences between open source and commercial source code.
An important issue that companies must remember with closed source software is the consequences of such code being leaked to the general populous. For example, the source code for the game Half Life 2 was leaked onto the internet in October 2003, prior to the release of the game. The result was that the release of the game was postponed. The source code for the Facebook home page has also been leaked onto a blog in the past, but removed soon afterwards. The release of code from websites such as Facebook brings up privacy and security concerns as the ways private information is handled becomes transparent. It would be worthwhile considering the other ways in which leaked source code affects the commercial production of software.
I must mention that your blog entry omitted the fourth fundamental principle of produsage: Common Property, Individual Rewards. In open source communities the source code is common property in the sense that it belongs to, and can be edited by everyone. Furthermore, producers within the community have access to rewards based on their level of contribution. They can develop credible identities within the community and become involved in more aspects of the software development process. Most importantly, produsers who have an ongoing, important and talented contribution to the community can end up being employed by commercial software companies to work on their projects. Thus, a positive, credible identity and income can be made from open source software if the levels of contribution by an individual are exceptional.
Post a Comment