Linux and Open Source

Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols & Paula Rooney

The most important value of open source

By | May 3, 2006, 10:59am PDT

Summary: Whether the project is server or client based, it is the standard which provides a base everyone can build on, and everyone can benefit from.

My work on a Drupal installation called Voic.Us has given me a window into something important.

That is, what is the most important value you get from open source?

My answer may surprise you.

It’s not seeing the source, because most of us don’t look at the source. It’s not the price of the software, because price is a miinimal factor in making software useful.

It’s the standard.

Every open source project is a standard on which members of that project can build. The more widely an open source project is adopted, the more value that standardization becomes.

This is why the value of an open source project goes up as more people use it. Whether the project is server or client based, it is the standard which provides a base everyone can build on, and everyone can benefit from.

Microsoft remains strong for the same reason, its standard. In that case, the details are kept secret, so builders are at a disadvantage, especially if Microsoft decides it wants to "embrace and extend" the standard into your niche.

But every open source project, no matter how small or niche, gets the same standards benefit as Microsoft because the code is open, and there is no owner to roll over you.

Open source makes everyone into Microsoft.

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

Dana Blankenhorn has been a business journalist for 30 years, a tech freelancer since 1983.

Disclosure

Dana Blankenhorn

Dana Blankenhorn has been a journalist, writer and part-time futurist for over 30 years.

At the present moment I run only a personal blog in addition to my ZDNet open source blog.

DanaBlankenhorn.Com has the subtitle The War Against Oil. In the past I have used it to write about political history, e-commerce, personal matters, some ideas related to open source, and The World of Always On, which is the idea of using sensors, motes and RFID to turn WiFi links into platforms for applications which live in the air.

My IRA account at Schwab holds a few tech shares, most notably some Intel and Applied Materials, but there are no open source companies in it. I don’t even own any CBS stock.

Biography

Dana Blankenhorn

Dana Blankenhorn has been a business journalist for nearly 25 years and has covered the online world professionally since 1985. He founded the Interactive Age Daily for CMP Media, and has written for the Chicago Tribune, Advertising Age's "NetMarketing" supplement, and dozens of other publications over the years.

4
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

Good question
DanaBlankenhorn 4th May 2006
When you join a project, you accept the standard, and work to extend it. So does everyone else. The standard is a moving target, and those who are members move that target.

When you have a proprietary product, you accept it passively. You are not a member of the "standards body" with, say, McAfee, in the way you can be with X.org.

Note, I only mentioned Windows as a standard. That is something to be built on. I did not mention McAfee, or the other proprietary application vendors. They are not creating standards.

My point was that, because they are open to change, everyone in the open source movement is working on a standard.
0 Votes
+ -
Standards? Buwahahaha
No_Ax_to_Grind 3rd May 2006
So tell me about the standards for Linux video. How about standard API's to write video drivers or video calls. How many "standard" Linux distros are there now, 100, 200? Dude, you wouldn't know a standard if it hit you along side the head.
0 Votes
+ -
A Balance Sheet
srdiamond 3rd May 2006
Maybe not. I'm not sure I know what a 'standard' is either, and this may be the wrong term for what is being described. Regardless, I think the author makes an important point. Open source provides a focus for coordinating efforts of programmers. This may be an important strength. On the other hand, it leads to an important limitation. Although the author says every small project enjoys the benefits, this means only potential benefits, based on the possibility that this small project can become a mass focus of effort. Where some code is not widely adopted, this advantage is greatly attenuated and the weaknesses of quality control in open source (i.e. other than that achieved through mass adoption)come to the fore.
0 Votes
+ -
First off..
xstep 3rd May 2006
Maybe you can explain what a standard is? The very fact that these groups of "people" organize and work together to code and compile applications is a standard in it's self. API's are being worked out, Not standard Distro's but leading Distro's and I count 6 with Red Hat and Suse at the top.

Not to mention LSB, Open Group, and many other groups of "people" forming standards.

So tell us what's wrong with the standards in proprietary software? How long for good drivers? All the exploits, viruses, and worms? How good is this standard? But it all works right?

Please tell us.. who are these people without standards? Hippie code heads and their free compilers... who the heck are they?
0 Votes
+ -
Good question
DanaBlankenhorn 4th May 2006
When you join a project, you accept the standard, and work to extend it. So does everyone else. The standard is a moving target, and those who are members move that target.

When you have a proprietary product, you accept it passively. You are not a member of the "standards body" with, say, McAfee, in the way you can be with X.org.

Note, I only mentioned Windows as a standard. That is something to be built on. I did not mention McAfee, or the other proprietary application vendors. They are not creating standards.

My point was that, because they are open to change, everyone in the open source movement is working on a standard.

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix