Society lives in the technology era. In the form of smartphones, television, tablets, and computers, the abundance of technology knows no limits and is extending its reach to all aspects of human life and culture, from the use of tablets as textbooks in schools, to the invention of biotechnology used to give the disabled the ability to walk again and the prospect that man, with the utilization of technology, has traveled beyond the limits of the atmosphere and landed on the craters of the moon. Technology has revolutionized the way humanity views the world, and its reaches only grow in potential as time goes on.
Behind the face of technology lies its components, the hardware, physical ...view middle of the document...
Along with that, Schweik concurs and argues that the purpose of open sourced software is to provide users the access to readable software code (Schweik, 2011, 219). Byrne disagrees with the prospect that OSS is always cheaper and references how open source software does not always aim to fit the consumer’s needs and is at times difficult to adjust the program. He complements OSS in the way that if custom needs, a strong IT staff, and resources such as time are in plenty then OSS can be bent into virtually anything (Byrne, 2009, 4).
On the other hand, proprietary software has survived based on a team of “designers, project managers, programmers, technical writers, and quality assurance engineers” (Boulanger, 2005, 240). In addition, when these products are completed they are sold or licensed to consumers for monetary compensation. According to the report by Furguson, Microsoft has used this system in their selling of Microsoft Windows and Office, although doing it controversially imitating the leaders of the field including IBM to further financial benefits (Furguson, 2005, 66). Complementary, Economides and Katsamakas determine that a proprietary platform uses strategic pricing for their programs while also offering complementary products which may be sold by other firms, a system called two-sided platform pricing. For example Microsoft licenses their operating system to their users, and also receives money from their support lines and other complementary applications such as Office (Economides, Katsamakas, 2006, 1057).
History behind the proprietary and open source debate
Boulanger draws the origins of OSS from a limited few, academics and researchers (Boulanger, 2005, 239). These academics often did not intend their projects to be used for public use, only for the ease of exchange. The majority of software that was developed for public use was “developed as commercial, proprietary products. Software was shipped to the customer with copyright licenses that placed restrictions… Moreover, the readable software-the proprietary source code logic- was not included in the shrink-wrapped packages; only the unreadable ‘runtime’ software” (Schweik, 219, 2011). It was not until the times of MIT computer scientist Richard Stallman, was OSS taken off as its own philosophy of the purpose of software. According to Furguson’s article published in MIT’s Technology Review, “Stallman resigned from MIT in 1984 and started a crusade” (Furguson, 2005, 66) as a result of the then popular UNIX operating system utilizing a proprietary view. From then on, Stallmen expanded his own interpretation of OSS, opposing UNIX. “He began work on an anti-unix operating system called GNU, which stands for GNU’s Not Unix. He created the Free Software Foundation to distribute that work and the idea of an open-source license to govern it” (Furguson, 2005, 66).
From then on Stallman’s ideals spread onto Linus Torvalds, who went on to create the original Linux...