I agree with most of the points in the article, but I'd point most of the blame on the rise of the Mobile Apps. Those who would have been the next generation of open source programmers are instead releasing closed source apps. Some of the reasons are the same as Zed points out (lower bar for 'making a company out of it') but some of the direction comes from the corporations backing the App Stores and selling the mobile devices.
For many common tasks, there are a plethora of Apps out there the do pretty much the same simple thing, in a mostly functional but considerably klunky manner. In the open source world, one of these would take the lead, incorporate the best features of the competitors, and then developers would pitch their efforts behind the winner increasing the lead even farther. Instead, every week there's a new closed-source work-alike.
It feels like a regression back to the pre-open-source days of shareware. Instead of a pooling of efforts, everyone is duplicating the work that's already been done. Instead of building a solid foundation, there's a glorification of throwing something together in an afternoon from "premade parts" and "stock libraries" --- perhaps they grow on trees --- and putting it out there for sale.
Android is considered the more open environment, but on my Linux based Android phone, I don't know if there are any open-source Apps that I use --- maybe the Camera is stock? In contrast, on my desktop (also Linux) I can't offhand think of any programs I use regularly that aren't open source (I guess Flash, if you count it as a program).
I don't think this is by accident. Why for example does Google have such a lousy closed-source email App? I feel certain a forked open-sourced version would be vastly improved within weeks, and anyone who didn't think so would still be free to use the original. Believe it or not, it's actually reasonably common practice to disassemble an App like this to byte code, and then try to patch this and reassemble it into a working App. (http://code.google.com/p/smali)
At one point I thought it was the phone companies that were setting this course, but now I'm not so sure. Microsoft tried to kill off open source through FUD and marketing, but surprisingly they didn't have the clout. But now Apple and Google might just kill it off by creating a thriving business for 99 cent Apps --- because who's going to release the source for a whole afternoon's work when someone might just steal it and put a closed-source version up on the App store and maybe become a millionaire?
No, I'm referring to the Google Gmail app. Although Google owns Android, there is a large distinction between the open-source Android base and the closed-source Google apps. K9 sounds like a fine improvement over the stock email app, and an example of what would happen if Google would release the Gmail app as open-source. Yet they choose not to --- why?
For many common tasks, there are a plethora of Apps out there the do pretty much the same simple thing, in a mostly functional but considerably klunky manner. In the open source world, one of these would take the lead, incorporate the best features of the competitors, and then developers would pitch their efforts behind the winner increasing the lead even farther. Instead, every week there's a new closed-source work-alike.
It feels like a regression back to the pre-open-source days of shareware. Instead of a pooling of efforts, everyone is duplicating the work that's already been done. Instead of building a solid foundation, there's a glorification of throwing something together in an afternoon from "premade parts" and "stock libraries" --- perhaps they grow on trees --- and putting it out there for sale.
Android is considered the more open environment, but on my Linux based Android phone, I don't know if there are any open-source Apps that I use --- maybe the Camera is stock? In contrast, on my desktop (also Linux) I can't offhand think of any programs I use regularly that aren't open source (I guess Flash, if you count it as a program).
I don't think this is by accident. Why for example does Google have such a lousy closed-source email App? I feel certain a forked open-sourced version would be vastly improved within weeks, and anyone who didn't think so would still be free to use the original. Believe it or not, it's actually reasonably common practice to disassemble an App like this to byte code, and then try to patch this and reassemble it into a working App. (http://code.google.com/p/smali)
At one point I thought it was the phone companies that were setting this course, but now I'm not so sure. Microsoft tried to kill off open source through FUD and marketing, but surprisingly they didn't have the clout. But now Apple and Google might just kill it off by creating a thriving business for 99 cent Apps --- because who's going to release the source for a whole afternoon's work when someone might just steal it and put a closed-source version up on the App store and maybe become a millionaire?