Software Engineers/Developers: Open Source or Proprietary?

[ubechoco2009]

There's always pros and cons between them, but how would you evaluate them as a software engineer/developer/programmer? Economically and socially or whatever comes into your mind. Post your most obsessive reaction to the topic.

My reaction would be, Open-source is free but some are not fully developed or updated due to lack of financial capability, but I know there are some private companies who would sponsor it, but to those who are working independently it would be hard, well software development difficulties are normal. Proprietary, one of the best in the software development industry but as I've said it's proprietary. Need I say more? Proprietary software are easier to use and maintain, they have interfaces and components ready to be drag-and-drop and development would take a short period. Again, it's proprietary.

[radianLB]

mag open source ka kung wala kang budget at maliit lang company mo (less than 10 employees). i use open source and others in my projects (netbeans, eclipse, linux, etc...). pero kung malaki na business mo mas maganda kung gumamit ka na lang ng proprietary sw. may full support, documentation, updates and hotfixes from the company.

[ubechoco2009]

^ i agree with updates and hotfixes, halos mapuno ang add/remove programs mo ng updates. hehe :)

[zany_cynic8]

It really depends on what you need. If you can have it for free why pay for it? If a free software can get the job done well I'll go for it. Of course I'll choose a free product that has full support and is well documented.

A lot of good open source are out there, Eclipse, Netbeans, Linux and Firefox are examples of it.

I think some open source gives more features and tools (i.e. Linux), also a bug in an open source can be easily traced and fixed unlike the proprietary software where you have to wait and pray that they'll fix it right away so that you can apply their patch and use it accordingly.

Well the thing that I don't want in some proprietary software is that after just fixing some bugs and adding some not so good or still buggy features in their product they'll package it and sell it for much higher price. *peace*

[radianLB]

there are no easy bugs to trace and fix, whether you are using proprietary or open source software. and remember most open source developers use their free time to contribute to open source projects, they wont be able to fix it right away if there are only a few active developers. and with open source software if you see a bug it is you who should fix it not "they", thats the reason why the sources are available.

proprietary sw companies have a lot to lose if they dont offer support to their product.

It really depends on what you need. If you can have it for free why pay for it? If a free software can get the job done well I'll go for it. Of course I'll choose a free product that has full support and is well documented.

A lot of good open source are out there, Eclipse, Netbeans, Linux and Firefox are examples of it.

I think some open source gives more features and tools (i.e. Linux), also a bug in an open source can be easily traced and fixed unlike the proprietary software where you have to wait and pray that they'll fix it right away so that you can apply their patch and use it accordingly.

Well the thing that I don't want in some proprietary software is that after just fixing some bugs and adding some not so good or still buggy features in their product they'll package it and sell it for much higher price. *peace*

[Krakista]

Most open source companies are really in the proprietary software business. The open source label is just for marketing--to get adoption from the masses. In reality, they incorporate much proprietary code that are not released to the public. There's no money to be made in pure open source.

[zany_cynic8]

there are no easy bugs to trace and fix, whether you are using proprietary or open source software. and remember most open source developers use their free time to contribute to open source projects, they wont be able to fix it right away if there are only a few active developers. and with open source software if you see a bug it is you who should fix it not "they", thats the reason why the sources are available.

proprietary sw companies have a lot to lose if they dont offer support to their product.

In a software developer's view (open source contributor) I think it is easier to fix a bug if it is an open source since I can look into the code and see where that bug came from then apply a patch to it. Not like that of the proprietary software.

"unlike the proprietary software where you have to wait and pray that they'll fix it right away" - "they" pertains to those people who manages the proprietary software.