Blog This!   Lee Geistlinger's Web Log
Blog Home
Blog Archives
LittleGhost Home

E-mail: geistlinger AT gmail.com

Loading
Pic 'O the Day
Top 10 Lists
Everyone loves lists
Reviews
Books, Movies and so on
Blogroll
Feed Me!

XML Feed

Feeds I Read

My Online Aggregator

Theme
• Default
• Spring
• Summer
• Autumn
• Winter
• Black & White
• Gray & White
• MT-ish
• Classic
Listening To...
Evidence of Efforts

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Valid CSS!

[Valid RSS]

Recent Posts
 Saturday, November 26, 2005
Open-Source Silliness

Tim Bray points to what it a very odd ZDNet blogger entry by Dana Blankenhorn suggesting - well, saying - that open-source applications are overwhelmingly just followers, not innovators. (And so what's the use of it?)

While there is a certain degree of truth to this - Open Office is replicating MS Office, the GIMP trying to give the world a free Photoshop and so on, this isn't the whole story. Because you could say the same thing for closed source software.

I really don't see a lot of breakthrough apps on either side; sometimes the first innovator remains the best (Apache) in many respects; in some cases, the innovator falls by the wayside as others jump on this band wagon (Netscape eclipsed by IE, later by Firefox and Safari; Radio blogs bested by SixApart and Blogger). There are different types of innovation: breakthrough and incremental, for example.

And let's take a look at a handful of OSS projects that were truly innovative and still remain the leaders:

Also, Blankenhorn missed the mark - to me - by suggesting that apps are only innovative if they are totally new (for example, he points to TiVo, which is a good example of such; another [more retail] would be Netflix).

But sometimes the way an app/software is innovative is in the way you can use it, or how you can build it. JavaScript, for example, is a weak language. But you put it in a browser and can do things client-side: No server hit. Whoo-hoo! This made it powerful if it were the first or 1,000th incarnation of this type of language.

And do you every wonder why there are so many (according to surveys) VB coders vs, for example, C++ coders? Two reasons: 1) VB is built to be easy to use; 2) MS's Visual Studio is an amazing work environment. Easy - but powerful - language with a great IDE. Duh. So we gots lots of VB apps.

If you applied Blankenhorn's statements to cars instead of software, well, hell, the Toyota Prius, Audi Quattro and Hummer H2 are all just efforts to replicate the Model T (or perhaps Daimler's and Benz's first horseless carriage...).

Blankenhorn also misses one very important point, one he almost captured...but missed.
Projects like Mozilla and Openoffice are all about offering free replacements to proprietary monopolies. Databases like mySQL are still working on "innovations" proprietary products had years ago.

This is true in Linux as well and it's not necessarily a bad thing.

See - he almost had it: One of the truly innovative aspects of open-source software is that it is about offering free replacements to proprietary products.

View this as a good thing or bad (Blankenhorn agrees, at least for Linux, this is a good thing), it's definitely new.

And innovative, Ja?

- Posted by Lee at 4:26 PM Permalink #
^Top | Top Ten Home | Blog This! Home | Blog This! Archives