Business Accounting help....

This may be a little OT, but why would anyone write software for free? Why are people philosophically opposed to paying for it? I can understand being frugal but with some people it's the principle too.
 
This may be a little OT, but why would anyone write software for free? Why are people philosophically opposed to paying for it? I can understand being frugal but with some people it's the principle too.
To show off, demonstrate their ability, practice with something and share it with others, or hope for monetary contribution.

www.jesseweather.com is something free, useful, that demonstrates the skills of the programmer. You can also contribute something for his effort.
 
This may be a little OT, but why would anyone write software for free? Why are people philosophically opposed to paying for it? I can understand being frugal but with some people it's the principle too.

Mari - lots of people make good money in the free software business. Quite often the company will develop the software, open source it, then sell commercial support for the software. The bonus is that they get people in "the community" adding features and fixing bugs for free.

If you think about it the model makes a lot of sense. You can still make money and if your company ever goes to hell the software will live on. If you are a person making technology decisions the fact that a company going out of business won't make your technology junk is very attractive.

Nick is more concerned with the code being open source then the actual price tag. Commercial closed source software is often way harder to support, makes your company needlessly dependent on another, etc.

It's not so much about the software having no price as much as it's about the software's source code being available to anyone to extend on.
 
Nick is more concerned with the code being open source then the actual price tag. Commercial closed source software is often way harder to support, makes your company needlessly dependent on another, etc.

It's not so much about the software having no price as much as it's about the software's source code being available to anyone to extend on.

Nailed it.

There's also the customization factor. If a piece of software doesn't do what I want it to, and its open source, I can usually make it do what I need and then submit it to the community if I think its something someone else might want (pay it forward, so to speak).

If a piece of closed source software doesn't do what I need, I'm at the mercy of the developer.

To answer Mari's question: Generally, FOSS has a model where either paid support, or a higher level of support is available for a charge. Ubuntu is a perfect example of that, since its a 100% free Operating System, but if you want Canonical's support, you pay for it. There are also some features that you can pay to have access to (Ubuntu One for example).

Compare Canonical's example to Microsoft for Windows support: If something is wrong with Windows, you still pay for support (a lot of money, btw), but there's no capability to modify the source to make it do what you want, AND you just blew like $300 for a license to use the software in a very limited and specific way.

Price is important to me and my company because I hate wasting money. Open sourceness is important because it ensures (or helps ensure) longevity in the choices that are made today.

Plus - you should see how cheaply one can buy a really old server, install Linux on it, and have a Server that runs more efficiently than a brand new server running Windows Server on it. Linux is the ultimate way to save money on server technology (desktops too).
 
There's also the customization factor. If a piece of software doesn't do what I want it to, and its open source, I can usually make it do what I need and then submit it to the community if I think its something someone else might want (pay it forward, so to speak).
How many people are interested in doing this compared to the number of people who use software?

To answer Mari's question: Generally, FOSS has a model where either paid support, or a higher level of support is available for a charge. Ubuntu is a perfect example of that, since its a 100% free Operating System, but if you want Canonical's support, you pay for it. There are also some features that you can pay to have access to (Ubuntu One for example).

Compare Canonical's example to Microsoft for Windows support: If something is wrong with Windows, you still pay for support (a lot of money, btw), but there's no capability to modify the source to make it do what you want, AND you just blew like $300 for a license to use the software in a very limited and specific way.
I have a computer with Ubuntu on it because I had to get a new hard disk and didn't have a system restore disk. It's OK for limited use but it seemed like whenever I researched some solution to a problem it would involve messing with the code. I would go to the user forums and have no idea what they were saying. I'm sure you, Jesse and other computer geeks would be all over it but I didn't feel it was suitable for the average user.

As far as Windows goes, I have had many versions of it and have never had a problem I couldn't solve myself by looking up solutions on the internet. I've never called Windows support. I recently bought a MacBook Air but there were some programs I use that only have a Windows version so I bought Windows 7. It works just fine and it wasn't $300, it was $179.99. I'll agree that's a fair amount of money but to me it's worth it for something I know I won't need to tinker with.

So my next question is to ask how many bigger, established companies use open source software as opposed to commercial packages.
 
So my next question is to ask how many bigger, established companies use open source software as opposed to commercial packages.

Not nearly as many as probably should. That is going to be one of the things I do "right" with this business.

Will it work? I think so. We'll see.
 
Not nearly as many as probably should. That is going to be one of the things I do "right" with this business.

Will it work? I think so. We'll see.
I hope things work out for you, both the business in general and the software angle. I can see how open source software would be attractive to people who are interested in perpetuating and improving it. However, I think the average user is only attracted by the free aspect. Some things that are free are great but in some instances you get what you pay for.
 
So my next question is to ask how many bigger, established companies use open source software as opposed to commercial packages.

Our company has a couple of its intranet sites running PHP, but the vast majority is either Microsoft .NET or Java.

I'm currently developing internal web tools on PHP, but based on the outcome of a meeting my boss's boss had yesterday, we might be working with corporate IT to get the tools 'corporatized' for mass distribution, so that could mean a total re-write for a non-open-source platform. Web platforms are a bit different than desktop applications, though.

As far as desktop apps, I can't think of a single open-source app that is supported by our IT dept. The company I work for is in the top-5 employers in the world, so I think we qualify as an 'established' company. ;)
 
Our company has a couple of its intranet sites running PHP, but the vast majority is either Microsoft .NET or Java.

I'm currently developing internal web tools on PHP, but based on the outcome of a meeting my boss's boss had yesterday, we might be working with corporate IT to get the tools 'corporatized' for mass distribution, so that could mean a total re-write for a non-open-source platform. Web platforms are a bit different than desktop applications, though.

As far as desktop apps, I can't think of a single open-source app that is supported by our IT dept. The company I work for is in the top-5 employers in the world, so I think we qualify as an 'established' company. ;)

Similarly, being in a fortune 250 company, we also only use closed source software at my job. Even for web technology.
 
How many people are interested in doing this compared to the number of people who use software?

I have a computer with Ubuntu on it because I had to get a new hard disk and didn't have a system restore disk. It's OK for limited use but it seemed like whenever I researched some solution to a problem it would involve messing with the code. I would go to the user forums and have no idea what they were saying. I'm sure you, Jesse and other computer geeks would be all over it but I didn't feel it was suitable for the average user.

As far as Windows goes, I have had many versions of it and have never had a problem I couldn't solve myself by looking up solutions on the internet. I've never called Windows support. I recently bought a MacBook Air but there were some programs I use that only have a Windows version so I bought Windows 7. It works just fine and it wasn't $300, it was $179.99. I'll agree that's a fair amount of money but to me it's worth it for something I know I won't need to tinker with.

So my next question is to ask how many bigger, established companies use open source software as opposed to commercial packages.

Open source software powers the Internet.
 
I used to be a huge open-source zealot.

Then I realized that both open and closed source can both produce really good or really awful software, and that the biggest problem the computer/IT/tech world faces is people accidentally not choosing best-in-breed software and then struggling with it, oftentimes for years, once the get stuck using something.

My advice today is "Use the best software you can find."

I'm not going to whip out the Linux box to do video/movie editing, for example. Nor for anything that requires a consistent desktop look and feel or a standards-based UI. (I've been running Linux since window managers like FVWM were brand new things and to get X to run you had to do your own math to tell it the clock speeds of your monitor.)

But I wouldn't hesitate to use one for a web server.

Just two examples out of thousands. The point being that software "engineering" often doesn't even come close to the quality and professionalism level needed to say someone's an engineer in other disciplines. No tests/certification boards, no personal liability like Civil Engineers have, etc. Again, depends on the software too. Avionics Engineers often are acutely aware of their role in keeping other people alive and whole. But, say... Banking software engineers... How much liability do they have for things like the "Flash Crash"?

Software is an interesting world. I contend that quality trumps whatever "religious" camp someone's in regarding open or closed...

Software tribes have their high-priests (Richard M. Stallman, Ballmer, Ellison, Eric S. Raymond, Steve Jobs, etc.) and their temples, but rarely do people in those churches convert religions. Some people really need those religions. Software religion agnostics/atheists get the benefit of hopping around using concepts from all the tribes.

"Use software that works," I say. "If nothing works, consider writing it. Your choice on what to do with it. True software 'libre' is you get to choose whether to open or close the source, because you're the author. Choose whatever's best for you."

It's deeply ironic that Mr. Free Software himself not only requests but often demands that we all open-source. (Stallman) That's not true Freedom, that's actually an attempt at mild tyrrany! Ha! But it's also to be expected of the head of any religion to demand some seemingly unreasonable things and ask us all to believe. "You can't fully understand until you believe as I do," so to speak.

The line that always puts it all in perspective with humor for me is the advice an old friend's college professor told him in the late 60s at Ohio State University. "Why are you wasting time with that? Computers are just a passing fad!". He followed his passion and has had a computer career ever since. Quite a successful one.
 
More explanation?
The majority of the websites on the internet are using open source web servers and open source operating systems. Most of the DNS servers are open source as well. Same for the database servers.

Many of the websites out there are built using open source libraries like jQuery.

Once you start getting into the server world, in particular the web server world (my line of work) the majority of the software being used is open source.
 
Then I realized that both open and closed source can both produce really good or really awful software, and that the biggest problem the computer/IT/tech world faces is people accidentally not choosing best-in-breed software and then struggling with it, oftentimes for years, once the get stuck using something.

My advice today is "Use the best software you can find."

That's what I was trying to say. :thumbsup:

Software tribes have their high-priests (Richard M. Stallman, Ballmer, Ellison, Eric S. Raymond, Steve Jobs, etc.)

I wonder how many people really know who Richard Stallman is... Well, before your post anyway. I admit, I had to look up Eric S. Raymond.
 
More explanation?
IOS is open source?.... There's a whole lot of closed source software powering the internet too.

There's a lot of value in open source software IF one is ready to live within the limits.

For governments and companies, concerns with security and liability often force them to a closed source model so there is somebody else they can go after if a problem arises.
 
so there is somebody else they can go after if a problem arises.
That is the kind of IT I hope I never have to work. If there is a problem I expect the company to go after me. Some places are just a constant game of everybody pointing fingers.

That really has nothing to do with open source or closed source. That's just about having support contracts - which are available for either model.
 
IOS is open source?.... There's a whole lot of closed source software powering the internet too.

I'm not aware of any web servers that run on iOS.

There's a lot of value in open source software IF one is ready to live within the limits.

For governments and companies, concerns with security and liability often force them to a closed source model so there is somebody else they can go after if a problem arises.

That's a short sighted way of looking at Open Source software. Security can often be tighter and more easily controlled in Open Source Software because the security mechanisms in place can be verified. I'm not a big fan of pointing fingers, but if one wants to point fingers at a security flaw in most Open Source Software, the developer can probably be the one to blame. Or they can take the ownership of the problem themselves, and rather than assign any blame, just fix the problem.
 
Hey Nick, I just got back to this thread (busy, and dirty, getting tractors running for spring plowing)...

Yup, you are right on the money... I'm over 65 (waaaay over) SO, that pegs me as a hopeless technophobe, right? Only capable of writing down a customer number with my #2 pencil and then only if I wet the lead on my tongue first...

'Cept, I was writing machine language code, and doing binary coded octal to hex address conversions in my head back in the 60's (before you were born, most likely)... This was long before personal computers...

Anyway, my suggestion was partly tongue in cheek, but mostly to get you to think about that is desirable and what is necessary... If your business needs are beyond manual record keeping, then wunnerful, go find 'your' perfect software...

cheers and good luck....

denny-o
 
I'm not aware of any web servers that run on iOS.
So the internet is just web servers? Pfft! The internet is about ROUTING, baby! (and switching and bridging and load balancing and DNS and....)

And YES there are routing platforms that are open source, but the vast majority of the "internet" traffic is handled by devices running closed source software.
 
I'm not aware of any web servers that run on iOS.



That's a short sighted way of looking at Open Source software. Security can often be tighter and more easily controlled in Open Source Software because the security mechanisms in place can be verified. I'm not a big fan of pointing fingers, but if one wants to point fingers at a security flaw in most Open Source Software, the developer can probably be the one to blame. Or they can take the ownership of the problem themselves, and rather than assign any blame, just fix the problem.

It's not enough to blame the developer. One has to be able to sue the developer, or at least have a legal mechanism to either force the problem to get fixed or to seek compensation for damages.

There are lots of gov't agencies running OSS that has been "commercialized" with a vendor providing support and updates for it, along with vetting the code.

Sun has a great model with Open Solaris... They get the benefit of free software development, then take the best of it, certify it, and put it into their paid product and support it.

I've got nothing against OSS. I'm just saying that there are reasons that OSS hasn't yet taken over the large enterprises, and it's not merely because the IT folks who run those enterprises are dweebs. They have legitimate business reasons for making the choices they make.
 
Hey Nick, I just got back to this thread (busy, and dirty, getting tractors running for spring plowing)...

Yup, you are right on the money... I'm over 65 (waaaay over) SO, that pegs me as a hopeless technophobe, right? Only capable of writing down a customer number with my #2 pencil and then only if I wet the lead on my tongue first...

'Cept, I was writing machine language code, and doing binary coded octal to hex address conversions in my head back in the 60's (before you were born, most likely)... This was long before personal computers...

Anyway, my suggestion was partly tongue in cheek, but mostly to get you to think about that is desirable and what is necessary... If your business needs are beyond manual record keeping, then wunnerful, go find 'your' perfect software...

cheers and good luck....

denny-o

I meant no offense (and tried to impart that in the post). One thing I've noticed, and the reason I brought up age, is because there is a pretty big difference in what is considered "basic necessity" between generations. I've noticed, for example, that people under 35 consider a computer to be a necessity for most any efficient purposes (businesses included). People over 60 or 65, depending, generally feel that most things can be done just as well by hand with paper.

Its not a bad thing, because both are right, I was just testing my theory :D I think I was right ;)
 
So the internet is just web servers? Pfft! The internet is about ROUTING, baby! (and switching and bridging and load balancing and DNS and....)

And YES there are routing platforms that are open source, but the vast majority of the "internet" traffic is handled by devices running closed source software.
Routing is an exception, there is always an exception, but the point is that a lot of serious business is done with open source and nearly every website most people care about wouldn't work if you removed the open source software.
 
There's a big difference between being computer-literate (and perhaps even competent) and farting around with networks. I ran the project to install the first computer-based inventory control/BOM system at Beech Aircraft, and was a Quicken/Quickbooks consultant for many years. OTOH, I could care less about all the internet and network BS.

PS: Why didn't you ask Denny if he wanted to compare financial statements?

I meant no offense (and tried to impart that in the post). One thing I've noticed, and the reason I brought up age, is because there is a pretty big difference in what is considered "basic necessity" between generations. I've noticed, for example, that people under 35 consider a computer to be a necessity for most any efficient purposes (businesses included). People over 60 or 65, depending, generally feel that most things can be done just as well by hand with paper.

Its not a bad thing, because both are right, I was just testing my theory :D I think I was right ;)
 
Sun has a great model with Open Solaris...

Just for the record, Sun is gone. Oracle bought them.

Oracle is closing everything slowly down to their usual pay-to-play model. They have no idea how to be open, nor is it their culture.

Forks are happening but without the significant financial support of Sun paying coders, OpenSolaris is doomed to mediocrity, IMHO.

VirtualBox was the best thing out of modern-day Sun, and Oracle will probably screw that up too...

Java is also under fire.

Oracle showed their method of operation with MySQL which also forked when they changed the licensing.

But we'll all get to continue to watch Sean Tucker's antics. Cash money to Oracle is what they do. Always have. ;)

Sun's "Gold" support network was slowly outsourced to companies who hired a lot of non-Unix folks who had to be carefully managed, lest they walk in, rip out your dead drive before you could take it out of the array, and run.

And a friend who's a left-over from StorageTek and waaaay up the Sun Storage foodchain warned me that he's worked numerous "Your data is just... Gone..." tickets since ZFS was released.

Huge escalated tickets when running ZFS which the Sun Engineers couldn't recover ANY data in giant systems. In fact, he's younger than 40 and worked himself into what his Doc described as a stress-induced stroke. There weren't any "community" folks fixing the real problems deep in ZFS, that's for sure.

Sun is dead. Long live Sun.
 
Just for the record, Sun is gone. Oracle bought them.

Oracle is closing everything slowly down to their usual pay-to-play model. They have no idea how to be open, nor is it their culture.

Forks are happening but without the significant financial support of Sun paying coders, OpenSolaris is doomed to mediocrity, IMHO.

VirtualBox was the best thing out of modern-day Sun, and Oracle will probably screw that up too...

Java is also under fire.

Oracle showed their method of operation with MySQL which also forked when they changed the licensing.

But we'll all get to continue to watch Sean Tucker's antics. Cash money to Oracle is what they do. Always have. ;)

Sun's "Gold" support network was slowly outsourced to companies who hired a lot of non-Unix folks who had to be carefully managed, lest they walk in, rip out your dead drive before you could take it out of the array, and run.

And a friend who's a left-over from StorageTek and waaaay up the Sun Storage foodchain warned me that he's worked numerous "Your data is just... Gone..." tickets since ZFS was released.

Huge escalated tickets when running ZFS which the Sun Engineers couldn't recover ANY data in giant systems. In fact, he's younger than 40 and worked himself into what his Doc described as a stress-induced stroke. There weren't any "community" folks fixing the real problems deep in ZFS, that's for sure.

Sun is dead. Long live Sun.
All true. my client has millions in Sun hardware, and Oracle's new licensing and support model is driving us away.
 
I'm not aware of any web servers that run on iOS.

Well, someone made one way early on - I think even pre-App Store. It's not that hard when you have a jailbroken phone to do such things - I had full-on BSD enabled on my original iPhone after I jailbroke it. Delightfully geeky. :D I was tethering by running tinyproxy on it. Well, someone decided to compile Apache on it, and run a site, just because they could.

However, Tim didn't say iOS. He said IOS. iOS = Apple mobile gadget OS. IOS = Cisco router IOS ("Internetwork OS").
 
Capital I OS, Nick. Tim's referring to Cisco's router & switch operating system.

Ah yes. I remember the IOS dartboard at a former employer well. The CCIEs would throw a dart at the various versions out to see which one they'd put on the core routers for 18 data centers, because none of them were stable.

This was the early days of the 7206VXR with the first generation cards. Cisco eventually did a quiet recall on all of them because they never could run full DS3 speeds even though that was what they were built for.

I have a love-hate relationship with Cisco gear. It's its own religion and cult. I don't mind it, but I pour the kool-aid out in the bathroom sink while they're not looking. ;)
 
Ah yes. I remember the IOS dartboard at a former employer well. The CCIEs would throw a dart at the various versions out to see which one they'd put on the core routers for 18 data centers, because none of them were stable.

This was the early days of the 7206VXR with the first generation cards. Cisco eventually did a quiet recall on all of them because they never could run full DS3 speeds even though that was what they were built for.

I have a love-hate relationship with Cisco gear. It's its own religion and cult. I don't mind it, but I pour the kool-aid out in the bathroom sink while they're not looking. ;)

Yeah. Back when I was still involved with my business (it's still going, just without me :)) we were a Cisco dealer. Their stuff is interesting - Looks cool, mostly works but not 100% and not easy, royal pain in the butt to fix.

Despite being a Cisco dealer, we didn't sell much of their stuff because we had to support it, too. :rofl:
 
Yeah. Back when I was still involved with my business (it's still going, just without me :)) we were a Cisco dealer. Their stuff is interesting - Looks cool, mostly works but not 100% and not easy, royal pain in the butt to fix.

Despite being a Cisco dealer, we didn't sell much of their stuff because we had to support it, too. :rofl:
If you want to see buggy. Try some of their competitors products, like Sonicwall, or SMC.

I'm no CCIE but I've been happy with our Cisco 3750G 48TS switches and our ASA firewalls.
 
Back
Top