Open Source Apps Should Start Innovating – Not Copying

Leave a Comment.

Comments

1. April 29, 2009 at 5:01 pm

   dd

   

   hate to break it to you… but what exactly did chrome do that hadn’t already been done?

   Webkit ? Welcome to safari
   Tabs? Opera, FF and IE have has them for years
   Speed Dial? Opera and FF had plugins

   The only thing original about it was per process tab.

   • Reply
2. April 29, 2009 at 5:04 pm

   Holden Page

   

   Webkit was adopted by safari not created by them

   IE has not had tabs for years. FFF and Opera have so that is a valid point.

   Chrome has per process tab (like you pointed out), integration with Google Gears and most importantly their amazingly fast javascript engine making it currently the fastest browser in the market.

   • Reply   More from author
3. April 29, 2009 at 5:29 pm

   Cibbuano

   

   I hear you… but I’m having a tough time thinking up anything innovative. We need some cats that are way smarter than me to think up some crazy apps.

   Sometimes, you don’t realize how indispensable an application is until they invent it!

   • Reply   More from author
4. April 29, 2009 at 11:45 pm

   Copy Source Or Open Source? ~ Linux Fanatics

   [...] to select open source projects. Safe to say, I pay for what I use. All of that out of the way, this article I found today is calling into question the innovativeness of open source software as a [...]

   • Reply   More from author
5. April 30, 2009 at 5:14 am

   Bob

   

   Please learn the difference between there, their, and they’re. Thank you.

   • Reply
6. April 30, 2009 at 7:42 am

   Joe

   

   and what exactly have you done instead of just whining/blogging about it?

   • Reply
7. April 30, 2009 at 9:02 am

   Kaho

   

   @Joe – Not all of us are programmers or software developers, and most of us don’t want to be. But we are users. And as users, we want something that works right and does the job we need done in the most efficient manner possible for us. It is the user’s duty to provide functionality and usability input to programmers so that they can improve their product. One problem with open source developers is that they seem to forget, or don’t care, about the users and only develop to meet their own personal needs.

   • Reply
8. April 30, 2009 at 10:39 am

   Thomas M

   

   I think there is a lot of innovation happening through Open Source Development although not on all fronts. I’d like to quote Amarok 2 as an example where new UI principles are explored. It’s still rough around the edges and far from finished but I don’t see a commercial player being copied at all. For OO.org I think this is a different horse. If you are on a linux distribution you are often considered as citizen second class by commercial companies. As such I’m just glad I actually have a replacement for M$ Office since the latter is not available on my system and costs too much. I think with a broader adaption of Gnu/linux we’ll see more of this innovation happening.

   • Reply   More from author
9. April 30, 2009 at 12:00 pm

   Jeff

   

   Even if FOSS only copies functionality (at the beginning), I’m ok with that. I don’t need an innovative way to edit video and burn a DVD, I just want to do so on my budget. I don’t need an innovative way to write documents, I just want to write them without having to forfeit my kids’ Christmas presents. Sometimes (often) “good enough” software is all that is needed.

   If you want innovation, you can either pay for it or create it, and FOSS makes it possible for those who create to share with the world. Innovation is inevitable as a project proceeds (unless it dies which even happens in the proprietary world), and FOSS can and has certainly pushed innovation into the proprietary software world, but only after reproducing the SAME functionality that the competing proprietary software had (nobody would care about tabs in browsers if the browser didn’t support plugins, javascript, forms, etc.).

   Finally, lets not forget that Open Source means that the end user can (and often does) modify the code to meet their needs (yes, innovate). Let’s say you need an innovative feature that doesn’t exist in Nero. You can either write a letter to Nero (good luck with getting them to listen) and then pay them for their new release a few years down the road when/if they incorporate your idea, you can do without the feature, or you can create your own patches to an existing open source project and even provide the updates to the upstream developer for general inclusion.

   So yes, the apps you mentioned are clones, but they still have value to many and occasionally a new light glimmers from them which improves both Open Soruce and proprietary software alike.

   – Jeff

   • Reply
10. April 30, 2009 at 2:41 pm

    theCroc

    

    I think you are being unfair in your selection of projects. These projects set out specifically to replicate functionality people wanted. If you look outside of these three you will see tons of innovation. Just some examples:

    *Centralized software package management that makes it possible to update all software on the system through one interface

    *Central software repositories ensuring a big catalog of safe free software only a mouse click away.

    *Said software installable without the constant Next>Next>Next>Next>Finish installers that are so prevalent on windows systems

    *Multiple virtual workspaces

    *Sloppy mouse focus (Enables you to scroll text in an unfocused window

    *Compiz (Builds on the initial work done in OS X but goes far beyond it)

    *Dock launchers that make sense (Also Stacks before Apple did it)

    *Plugin frameworks for damn near any application. (It’s only recently that this has become common on windows outside of development software)

    *Hosting several domains on the same physical machine (Apache did it first)

    *TCP/IP (You know that thing that the entire Internet uses to communicate)

    I could go on. What I’m trying to say is that a lot of things that you think are copying commercial software is actually the other way around. There is a ton of innovation going on in free software today. But you selected a few non representative projects that supported whatever agenda you had in writing this post.

    • Reply
11. April 30, 2009 at 6:46 pm

    inogenius

    

    Did “Bob” really just complain about one grammatical error in the entire article?

    • Reply
12. April 30, 2009 at 6:49 pm

    Holden Page

    

    Yes Bob did

    I suppose he was angry that the point he was trying to make was shot down. Happens.

    • Reply   More from author
13. May 1, 2009 at 2:54 pm

    David

    

    You know, I got a free cookie at the bakery the other day, and I said “this is an okay cookie but it should be CAKE! I want FREE CAKE NOW! No, I don’t want to bake it myself!” and everyone just looked at me like I was crazy!

    • Reply   More from author
14. May 1, 2009 at 3:09 pm

    Alex Launi

    

    You’re apparently not an identi.ca user or you’d know they ARE innovating in microblogging. They’ve got tons of cool stuff that twitter does not have; groups being one awesome one that comes to mind immediately.

    Songbird isn’t innovating? The integrated browser, totally themeable, the ability to search for concert tickets for a band right from your media player? Yeah, this sounds exactly like an iTunes clone to me.

    Do some research next time before you make such bold claims.

    • Reply   More from author
15. June 14, 2009 at 11:53 am

    Message to Open Source: I Don’t Want to Code | Techgeist

    [...] I’ll tell you what I have done about it, absolutely nothing. Nor should I. I am what you call an end user, and as an end user I expect things to work correctly. I should not have to go through hoops and jump in and out of holes to get something to work properly. Yup, I know it is open source, I am aware of the fact I can editthe hell out of the program without the Microsoft police coming after me. I should not have to as an end user worry about learning how to code in C++, Python, Java, C# or whatever other language to have a functioning program.  Here is a comment that sums it all up: Not all of us are programmers or software developers, and most of us don’t want to be. But we are users. And as users, we want something that works right and does the job we need done in the most efficient manner possible for us. It is the user’s duty to provide functionality and usability input to programmers so that they can improve their product. One problem with open source developers is that they seem to forget, or don’t care, about the users and only develop to meet their own personal needs. – Kaho [...]

    • Reply   More from author