Of course closed source is inevitable. Most really awesome technology is closed source.
Not that I'm dissing open source, it has it's place, but it's not as good at really pushing the boundaries. I can't think of any open source I get super excited about and want to use every day.
Not the most exciting software, but I have no better closed-source alternatives to Firefox 3, TrueCrypt, OpenVPN, and lighttpd. But I agree, some of my favorite stuff is closed source.
The software on Wii and iPhone (which I know has open source components), come to mind immediately as two that are insanely popular and could never even be approached by open source projects.
I don't mean that open source is bad. I don't hate open source stuff. I like it. Another open source project I like a lot is the music stuff for monome.org and their boxes.
But the article said "Is closed sourcing inevitable? I sure hope not. But, we’ll see it play out one way or another over the next couple of years." which is a ridiculous thing to say. That's like saying "Is the sun rising inevitable? Tune in next year."
People who think closed source software might die to open source are like people who think that this week Giligan and crew might really get off the island.
Games aren't really about the software; they're about the storyline and graphics. Writers and artists aren't quite as into the open source stuff yet, so it makes sense that there aren't a lot of open source games. But the engine stuff has been done, and the open source games that do exist have interesting engines. Quake, for example.
Right. I never said anything about games. I'm getting all the open source people pissed. Ohh well it won't cost me a job.
I wonder if people not working on open source games has anything to do with it costing money to eat. (For you open source folks, money is a closed source system the mean government forces us to use so they can lock the entire population into one way of doing things. People with healthy self esteem feel comfortable charging a fair bit of it for their skills. Heard of it?)
But since you brought it up. I played quake what, 8, ten years ago.
> I wonder if people not working on open source games has anything to do with it costing money to eat.
No. Not everything is done for money. Do you watch TV? Do you play games? Do you post to Hacker News? Probably... but you're not getting paid. The point is you enjoy doing those things, so you don't need money.
Games are very tedious. They involve lots of artwork and testing things 1000000 times on a tight deadline. That's the perfect thing to pay people for, because the end result is profitable and people won't do those things for enjoyment.
You may think this means open source has failed, but it's just one specific instance of people not being interested in working on things for free.
Finally, most open source work is not done by volunteers for free, it's done by people being paid to solve some other problem. About half my work is contributing to open source projects. Initially writing stuff is good for our business, of course, but when we release it and other people add features, our apps are instantly more reliable, with no effort required by us. We put in some work, the community puts in some work, and the end result is we get twice the library (or whatever) for half the "cost". Of course we contribute to other peoples' projects too, it's just the right thing to do.
It's not a zero sum game. Everyone can win when everyone helps each other out. (I imagine the gaming industry isn't like this, though. Helping your competitor is probably Evil That Must Not Be Spoken Of. But other areas aren't like that.)
The wii is a game? That's like saying netflix is a movie. Is a chessboard a game now?
The stuff about the wii I was talking about wasn't the games but the software that manages the new controller. The new UI for the wii is what I meant. I'm not complaining there aren't open source games. I'm just saying I don't think open source regularly produces something like the wii interface or the iphone that's both really revolutionary and good enough for people to use all the time without effort. That's pretty well supported by evidence. Sometimes, open source produces good solutions I like to use.
Now, I think there are lots of projects that don't need to be easy enough for everyone to use or revolutionary. Open source is great for those situations and lots of others. Remember I don't hate open source stuff. I don't even know what it would mean for open source to fail or succeed.
Everyone wins when everyone helps each other out, but everyone also wins when a company pursues a singular vision an open source development style would cramp, and puts out something great closed source. It's not a zero sum game here either. [sarcasm]I don't think I'm trolling, I think you bitter open source cultists are projecting your misery at the better looking closed source people who get laid more then you onto my obviously true comment that probably everything in the world won't be open source in a year or two (just like Gilligan probably won't get off that island this time) and anyone who likes really awesome new stuff thats easy to use should thank God for that.[/sarcasm]
Not that I'm dissing open source, it has it's place, but it's not as good at really pushing the boundaries. I can't think of any open source I get super excited about and want to use every day.