“…is distributed under the Generic Public License.”
Oh, how I love to see those words in the About webpage of my software! Being the kind of person who frequently turns to the internet when he needs a new program, the presence of open source software has been invaluable to my computing experience. Being a slight technology junkie, or as some colleges like to call it “computer science major”, I constantly find that I need software that Microsoft Office just won’t cover. However, instead of running out to Best Buy and spending anywhere from $50-$250, I routinely open up my browser, type in my query, and almost instantly get presented with freeware for any application that I would need.
One would naturally wonder then, what practical purpose could freeware serve? Why would anyone conceivably spend time and produce content that they will gain no monetary reward from? True, some may be doing it out of the goodness of their hearts, but most cite the logic that they are creating and advancing the quality of the internet and the future of its users. Without freeware, some of the content produced on our internet would not exist, and some of the most talented creators of media and software would never have gotten started in their craft.
Let me explain. The ability of freeware allows anyone to partake in the creation of content that few would pursue under a purely closed software system. Because it’s free, someone that has an interest in a particular area of software can explore it, sacrificing only their time to do so. Imagine that you had an interest in audio editing and Windows Sound Recorder just wasn’t cutting it. You look online to find that Adobe Audition 3, no doubt great audio software, costs around $350 dollars. Who is going to pay $350 dollars to investigate an area of interest when you aren’t even sure how much you will like the experience! Luckily, because of open source, the user can download Audacity for free and have a basic audio editor that will satisfy all their beginner needs. The same goes even if you want to edit a photo: $200 in Photoshop or free in GIMP. My personal favorite, 3D modeling software, which will cost you $3500 for Maya vs. free for Blender. Who would ever spend that kind of money just to satisfy a notion of curiosity? Luckily, we have open source software, and this allows the creativity and interests of novices to flourish which would have been impossible under a closed software system. Some of these users even have the potential to create software of their own and contribute that to the online community. “How creativity depends on a rich commons. How one feeds on the other” (Lessig 6).
But wouldn’t then this abundance of free software destroy all closed software systems on the internet? As we can plainly see from the examples listed above, not at all. In fact, open software actually benefits these software developers. See, since closed software does bring in revenue, this revenue can be utilized to develop this software to a state that most freeware does not have the resources to reach. With a few rare exceptions, this allows closed software to contain more features, less bugs, and perform better than its freeware counterpart. Once open source users outgrow their freeware, these software companies now have a new customer that is much more likely to invest in their software. This is because these users now know they have an interest in this area and want software that can accommodate their newly acquired skillset. Because of open source, we have a system that is friendly for beginners, benefits those advanced, and provides a means to a more creative and prosperous technological age.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWould you say that freeware also allows companies to "test the water" of a certain type of program? I believe that you are correct in saying that freeware allows beginners (consumers) to try out a product but it also makes since that the companies producing the software would also be testing out the potential market for selling a closed program. If the trial version does well then the company can go ahead and upgrade the software, if not then the company is only out a little bit of time, money, and effort.
ReplyDeleteI feel that although sending out tester software might be beneficial for seeing the potential response for future closed software, there may be some unseen limitations. If open software is encouraged, isn't it possible that with all the innovators creating open software may be able to keep up with the technological advances, and consumer desires, for future software? I believe that controlled competition is necessary and the increase of open software would effect the sales of closed software in ways that could not be foreseen, or completely prevented.
ReplyDeleteI live for thirty-day trials. Often I pony up the full price, if a program does what I need.
ReplyDeleteI find it interesting that my favorite browser, Firefox, permits me to use plugins not available elsewhere. My free copy of Audacity will let me make my digital story as a model for the class' Project 4. And I run classes with Google applications.
Yet I pay for a good Operating System and high-end apps such as Photoshop and Dreamweaver (though the newest version of the latter is disappointing and making me consider a switch). I've never seen freeware as a threat to commercial software; if anything, it keeps the big software houses from charging us even more.