[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] Indexes: Main | Date | Thread | Author

[ba-ohs-talk] open source question

I'm trying to understand the reasoning why some/many/most/few(?) 
people believe that a broadly adopted / adoptable OHS 
should/could/must(?) be licensed under an Open Source license, and I 
would appreciate your insights, either to the list or to me 
individually.    (01)

Here are some reasons that are commonly mentioned on why Open Source 
vs. something else. Which ones are the uniquely important ones as it 
relates to OHS? What am I missing? (I am interested in the arguments 
unique to OHS, not a general open-source discussion of which we all 
have seen too many before ;-))    (02)

1) Open Source software tends to have less bugs and be more secure 
that Closed Source because of the constant source code peer review. 
(the "quality argument")    (03)

2) Open Source products are more innovative because more brains with 
more backgrounds can add more new, innovative things to the product 
more quickly than possible if one vendor keeps control. (the 
"innovation argument")    (04)

3) Open Source products can be distributed for free, and thus can be 
used by users/organizations that cannot afford the purchase / license 
of non-free software. (the "price argument")    (05)

4) Open Source products will not, ever, "go out of business" like a 
traditional software company or an unprofitable product line can. 
(the "no dead-end argument")    (06)

I mostly hear the price argument in the context of OHS, but that 
can't be all of it -- just changing the list price in different 
countries, or for different purchasers (e.g. schools) would solve 
that issue as well, and does not necessarily imply Open Source. So 
what is it about OHS that requires Open Source? I appreciate your 
insights ...    (07)

Cheers,    (08)

Johannes Ernst
R-Objects Inc.    (09)