This article, How Linux Could Overthrow Microsoft, in MIT's Technology Review caught me off-guard. The article is a fascinating overview of the open source and proprietary software models. It appears to be well-researched and written, and makes a compelling case for open source: ...For all its flaws, the open-source model has powerful advantages. The deepest and also most interesting of these advantages is that, to put it grossly, open source takes the bullshit out of software. It severely limits the possibility of proprietary "lock-in"--where users become hostage to the software vendors whose products they buy...
This article, How Linux Could Overthrow Microsoft, in MIT's Technology Review caught me off-guard.
The article is a fascinating overview of the open source and proprietary software models. It appears to be well-researched and written, and makes a compelling case for open source:
...For all its flaws, the open-source model has powerful advantages. The deepest and also most interesting of these advantages is that, to put it grossly, open source takes the bullshit out of software. It severely limits the possibility of proprietary "lock-in"--where users become hostage to the software vendors whose products they buy...
While this may apply to operating system and some popular desktop applications, I wonder how this argument applies to specialized software products. The argument continues:
"Proprietary products cannot be customized by users. Product quality is uneven, in part because outsiders cannot examine source code. If a vendor controls major industry standards, as Microsoft does, it can force customers to upgrade--change to a newer version, and pay more money--almost at will. Furthermore, because lock-in to a proprietary standard is so profitable, imitation is a major threat. Software vendors therefore spend large amounts of money pursuing patents to deter clones and lawsuits by rivals."
I certainly note this in some of the proprietary software we use. On the other hand, it seems to me that there are some software products that are suited for a proprietary model because the software is specialized and doesn't command a broad audience of users who are likely to be interested in developing customized software for the need. I can see that this would also be true for some specialized planning applications. For eaample, I've seen powerful planning and permitting software packages from a wide range of private firms that compete directly with each other. I have a hard time visualizing an open source package that would be able to compete here.
My guess would be that open source products like Linux will give Microsoft a good competitive challenge, and in the end, this will make both the Wintel and "Lintel" platforms stronger.
My $0.02.
Planetizen Federal Action Tracker
A weekly monitor of how Trump’s orders and actions are impacting planners and planning in America.
California plans to bury El Niño’s downpour
If the state plays its cards right, it may be able to store a billion acre-feet of El Niño’s water in aquifers.
Desperate measures: Advocates weigh draining Lake Powell to fill Colorado River
Draining the reservoir could reduce evaporation losses by a couple hundred thousand acre-feet.
Chicago voters approve permanent festival grounds, penalty for vacant property owners
Currently, major summer and fall festivals take over public parks for weeks at a time, drawing criticism from nearby residents
NYC votes to cut outdoor dining red tape, speed up permitting
New York City also voted to allow the Department of Transportation to begin work on urgent projects before notifying elected officials.
California appears to reject Prop. 45
The proposition would have expanded the projects that qualify for a streamlined environmental review, effectively paring down the California Environmental Quality Act.
FREE Course: Walkable City 1: Why Walkability?
After describing his path towards focusing on walkability as the essence of good planning, Jeff Speck marches through his five principal reasons for making more walkable places.
Reinventing Malls: Planning Alchemy—Turning Gray Fields Into Gold
The course focuses on the opportunities and imperatives that shape reinvention of mall sites.
City of Rosemead
Rutgers University, Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy
One Hundred Miles
Hunter College, City University of New York (CUNY)
The Architects Foundation
University of Cincinnati Online
City of Cambridge
Montrose County
The Pocatello Development Authority