A recent thread about Nightly Builds of WordPress has me kind of foaming (darn you, Doug!), and rather than take it out on unsuspecting members of the list (and then get flamed back for it), I figured I would write about it here, where it’s safe, and I can delete comments that contradict me. (Did I just say that?)
Yes. There are dozens of open source applications that will perform a specific function instead of the commercial application that is well-known for it. Indeed, there are many replacements for WinZip (the software in question in the linked thread) that are free, and some are even open source. But there are also dozens of closed source applications that work just as well.
People frequently ask, “Why are you supporting that commercial application, when there is this open-source application that works just as well?” Well, there are a few good answers to that, the first, and possibly not the most obvious, is – Why not?
There is this weird brand - like an adulterous “A” - that open source fans seem to place on closed source applications and the people who use them, but I don’t really see a lot of bad things about using those closed applications.
There are many applications that I just like. I like them. I like the software; how it works, what it does. I like the company that produced it. I like the name brand and the idea that there is someone I can call or email for support because I paid them for it as part of my purchase. I know that the company is going to be there and it’s not just a group of kids writing code on the weekends.
Moreover, many times the open source software simply isn’t as good as its commercial counterpart. Take Audacity, for instance. Audacity is cool, but Soundforge kicks its shiny metal behind. Sure, I’ll use Audacity in a pinch, but given the opportunity to choose which one I want, I’ll pick the better software because it’s better. Being open source doesn’t make software better.
Really, let’s face it. Open Office is darn cool. I use it at work because, well, I don’t need an office suite very often and so why pay for it? But Open Office is not Microsoft Office. At home, I use Microsoft Office. It’s better software.
On the whole, most open source software is pure crap. Don’t allow your mind to filter down the list of available open source to only the names of those products you can’t live without. For every Firefox-like gem there are a hundred projects that could use a quick trip to the bit-recycler.
Don’t get me wrong, I like the idea of open source. I don’t feel like my use of open source software really benefits the projects, though. Perhaps in some convoluted way it does, but a typical convincer I would hear would be, “Use open source and put those commercial software companies on notice.” Why would I do that? I like some of those companies.
WinZip might not be one of those companies that I would take extra effort to keep around. But their product is solid. Replacing it with 7-zip when you have a WinZip license is madness. 7-zip isn’t even all that good. (You want to talk about bad UI? Look at 7-zip.)
The truth is, I don’t even use WinZip, and my commercial zip application can handle tgz files just fine. It’s simply bothersome to me to know that the nightly build archives for WordPress must be in a generally inconvenient format for most Windows users. (And even that doesn’t affect me directly, since I get my copy from Subversion using the GPL Tortoise SVN.)
It strikes me as funny that .tar.gz files are as difficult to open on Windows as the Microsoft Office format is to open on Linux. I know that this is not the case, but it has the odor of something built as a barrier for entry by outsiders, and sounds like something Linux folks would complain about to high heaven if they were confronted with it.
Remember, Linux zealots - The Christian church planned Christmas on December 25th not only because it was close to their estimate of the day of Christ’s birth, but also because it was on the same day as a pagan festival. Making your operating system enough like what is in the mainstream is a good thing if you want converts. Only after you are firmly seated in the minds of the public can you denounce these “pagan rituals”.
Convincing Windows users that Linux can create zip files just as easily as Windows is good. Promoting a format that they’re not familiar with and have difficulty opening exhibits an arcane nature that will not help you spread your work.
