I like open source, but it’s not a religion for me. Proprietary software can be very useful.

· · Web · 4 · 1 · 4

@giffengrabber this is sort of my approach too. I see it as one way of sharing and building software among many. Sometimes it works great other times not so much.

@reedyn Indeed. And IMHO, for high-quality desktop applications, proprietary often beats open source. I gladly pay for those applications. It’s a lot of hard work to make one.

@giffengrabber indeed. I think this has more to do with most open source software having a focus on the solution and not the experience. Mastodon is a great exception :)

@reedyn yeah, Mastodon is an achievement for sure. I also believe federation and open source fits very well for this kind of system. Social media owned by corporations can be quite problematic to say the least.


I started using proprietary last September after 22 years on "the FOSS religion" and so far I've been very frustrated. It's been crashy and limited. This iPad would be better if it was the exact same way but had a git repo and a DFSG-compliant COPYING file.

I've been using straight.el and it's been such a dream but unfortunately it's only for Emacs packages.
@giffengrabber Conversedly, Emacs would not be better if I lost access to modify and distribute its source code.

@Sandra Of course not. Emacs is a great open source application.


So what I'm saying is that proprietariness is a bad quality (menar "dålig egenskap" snarare än "dålig kvalle"). All other things being equal, making an app proprietary makes it worse (by adding that bad quality) and making it free makes it better for that same reason.

The FOSS community has got 99 problems but the licenses ain't one.

One big problem in the FOSS community is that design—and by design I mean users' wishlists and half-baked ideas—is often undervalued, mocked even ("send patches or STFU"), while in business, people get paid to just design UI and UX (something I love to do!) One exception is Delta Chat which has a great "suggestions" program, leveraging all this design work and usability field testing.

@giffengrabber This is very true, but you need to think further regarding proprietary projects if you value your privacy which you should.

I use open sourced projects because I really love how open you have to be with your projects. You can't hide anything and if you do, your project can soon be disliked/hated by others. Love it!

@edgren Not all proprietary applications harvest PII. But sure, some do.

And yeah, the radical transparency of FOSS can often lead to great quality. Especially for libs, CLI applications, systems software, servers, and stuff like that.

I use open source a lot too.

@giffengrabber Also true. Some closed source softwares do not track you. But far too many does, unfortunately. And if you ask an American what they use, you'll mostly get "Google, Facebook, and Microsoft" or "Apple and Facebook" as an answer. I find that disgusting 😬 😱

Good that you use a lot of open source softwares 🙂 Personally, I use basically only FOSS. Linux, Firefox, VSCodium, Bromite, QKSMS, etc.

@edgren @giffengrabber while there are some truth to that, in reality code is just too complex to be able to catch all possible avenues that is available for someone with malice in mind.

We have all sorts of big named bugs as an example of this. Heartbleed for example

On the openess side I wholeheartedly agree. The web itself is a perfect example where much of the code is open source by nature.

@reedyn @giffengrabber Yepp. That is why the communities at for an example GitHub help projects out 🙂 Some bugs takes longer time to fix, of course, which is sad, but at least they are working on it. Hopefully also on that security bug you linked to.

@giffengrabber I like open source software because it's simply superior to proprietary software.

Open source software is created by people with love and passion. Proprietary software is created by people who's doing it for the money. There's no love or passion involved there.

@hund @giffengrabber that's a false dichotomy. That would mean that there are no developers who have a passion for their job and product and that are getting paid/salaried for it.

@hund @giffengrabber and having a passion for something does not mean that the resulting product is of high quality

Sign in to participate in the conversation

Mastodon-instance for Swedish. Requires a written motivation in a language listed in the FAQ for account approval.