Open Source

Open Source computer software is that whose “source code”, the code which generates the software's system or purpose, is either in the Public Domain or, more commonly, is copyright-protected by one or more persons or entities and licensed to anyone according to an Open Source License. This usually grants permission to use and redistribute the software, as well as to modify its source code and distribute modified versions, with at most minor restrictions, such as a requirement to preserve the authors' name and copyright statement in the code. The term Open Source in common usage now also refers to any software with publicly available source code, regardless of its license, and this has been a problem for the Open Source community as well as copyright holders. Much of the concern about source code has to do with the way Unix-based Operating Systems offer complete control and configuration to a “root” user, while Windows-based Operating Systems tend toward a myriad of hidden binaries (compiled code) which is not easily exposed. The one was designed from the start to be a closed commercial cash cow, while the other was designed from the start to be open, configurable, and stable.

“Open Source” vs “Free Software”

However, “Open Source” was hoped to be distinct from “Free Software”, to be applied to software that meets the terms of an Open Source Definition. The decision to adopt the name “Open Source” was based partly on the confusion caused by the dual meaning of “Free”. The Free Software Foundation intended “Free” to mean “Free Speech, not Free Beer,” but aside from these self-inflicted confusions, “Free Software” became associated with Zero Cost, a problem which was again exacerbated by the fact that a great deal of it is, in fact, free of charge. Many hoped that flooding the public with the phrase “Open Source” would eliminate these muddled ambiguities, making it easier to “market” to business users who might mistakenly associate “Free Software” with anti-commercialism. However, since its introduction, the “Open Source” label only confused the public even more, creating both a new way to say “Free” while at the same time adding a feeling of restrictions and conditions leading to legal exposures. This has confused the mere availability of the source code with the freedom to use, modify, and redistribute it.

The Free Software Definition is less restrictive than the Open Source Definition. As a consequence of this, Free Software is Open Source, but Open Source software may or may not be “Free”. In practice, the amount of software released under a license that meets the Open Source Definition yet is non-“Free” is relatively small. One example is the Apple Public Source License, which is considered Open Source but not Free because it does not allow private modified versions. By contrast, software distributed under both the GPL or BSD licenses, for examples, are considered both Free and Open Source. Confusion about this distinction is often blamed on the Media or the Public in general, but better public relations in the early days would have avoided it.

The Open Source “Movement”

There has been a large movement of programmers and other computer users hoping to give easy access to computer software, as a strong majority of programmers work on in-house applications. This movement grew out of a “Free Software Movement”, based upon political and philosophical ideals of “Freedom”, sometimes referred to as “Hacker Culture, while the “Open Source Movement” is more about a move away from singular corporate control of popular and proprietary closed source systems, which are seen as less secure or robust.

Proponents argue that “Open” and “Free” development allows for a superior software development process, where “bugs” and other issues are cleared out quickly and where system security is paramount. Some argue that developing “Open” software falls in line with Rational Self-Interest, while others argue that developing “Free” software ensures “Freedom” is at the core. Either way, stability, reliability, and security are frequently cited as reasons to support “Open” and “Free” software.

Considered the Gold Standard application of the Open Source model is the Linux group of Operating Systems, based on Unix and POSIX, and renowned for stability and security characteristics. A quarter century after the Millennium, Linux powers over 90% of all web server applications, and over 60% of all computer server applications. Android, a lightweight Operating System based on Linux, powers almost 75% of mobile devices. Companies producing Linux-based solutions include Google and Red Hat, as well as Apple, IBM, and others. Therefore, it seems there is little compelling economical reason to keep source code secret from competitors.

Key Figures

• Bruce Perens, creator of the Open Source Definition.
• Eric Raymond, author of The Cathedral and the Bazaar and Homesteading the Noosphere.
• Linus Torvalds, creator of Linux.
• Paul Vixie, creator of the Domain Name System (DNS).
• Richard Stallman, leader of the Free Software Foundation.

Key Projects

• MariaDB
• PHP
• Debian/Ubuntu
• FreeBSD/NetBSD/OpenBSD
• Linux and Android
• Mozilla
• OpenOffice
• Slackware

...and many others