Open vs Closed source

It seems to be a lot of scepticism against open source software at least in my field of work.

Some have told me on Facebook to get a “real” 3D reconstruction program.

If it’s cheap it can’t be good right?

1 Like

There certainly is open source software that seems to have been abandoned and does not work well. But there are many examples of open source software that is actively being developed, fills a need, and works well.

Examples:
Blender
QGIS
Gimp
Audacity
Inkscape
OpenDroneMap

There are obviously many, many more, but these are the ones that came to me without any effort :slight_smile:

4 Likes

Next time just give them this link: http://sites.fastspring.com/masseranolabs/product/bundlewindowsmacinstallerbusinesswithproprietarypricing :smiling_face:

3 Likes

:joy:
Might I recommend adding the following verbage:

At $4995, it perfectly avoids all your procurement barriers, thus can be placed on most pro-cards and ignored by most accountants, but is sufficiently expensive to make you feel special.

4 Likes

I spit out my water.

Has anyone bought that yet?

I 100% could have used WebODM at a prior employer if I had shown them this bundle.

3 Likes

:laughing: done!

2 Likes

:joy: :joy: :joy:

1 Like

Closed source software should be better than open source, for a very simple reason: When you do closed source, you can build on previous open source improvements, but not the other way around.

In fact, I don’t think there is photogrammetric software that isn’t based on micmac (developed since 2003, license freed since 2007).

Will private software be better? It should be in every sense, but I think that generally it focuses on making the workflow more accessible.

But that free software is not good, or not real, because it is free, is a great misconception.

2 Likes

Spot on. That’s why it’s important to use strong copyleft licenses instead of, say, BSD or MIT.

2 Likes

Of course, free software should only be usable in other free software.

However, even if the code is not directly reused, that the code is open and can be studied (perhaps the main freedom of free software) could be enough to improve a private code.

1 Like

Yes, but this is only part of the equation in code improvement (and many algorithms are documented in papers anyway for other reasons independent of code copyright controls). As a successful FOSS project, we also get to leverage this community of users, use cases, a broader and deeper crew of developers, etc than is available to most private code developers. I wouldn’t agree with an assessment that suggests closed source has any advantages over FOSS other than perhaps for really large conglomerates like the FAANG companies when they are doing closed source work. But FAANG monoliths are an economic regulatory failure that are already a commons theft and a macro-economic issue that needs addressed through regulatory means, not software licenses. That said, for the time being, AGPL appears to at least provide some protections against the FAANGs, in spite of the regulatory failures allowing those conglomerates.

1 Like

I should add: there is a FAANG group of developers that benefit the ecosystem under the banner of OpenSfM which is not an insubstantial contribution.

1 Like