2 ms·

But what OP says is true for OpenSource as well. If the whole company uses Ubuntu, Eclipse and some Linux tools, their workflow is tied to these products. No ma

by WA 7y ago

But what OP says is true for OpenSource as well. If the whole company uses Ubuntu, Eclipse and some Linux tools, their workflow is tied to these products. No matter if they're open source or not. If something gets abandoned that is crucial to the existing workflows, things get messy.

UI_at_80x24 7y ago
That's very true (I don't think OP was suggesting otherwise), but what OSS does more then closed-source is give you a way out. 99 times out of 100 there will be an option/method to migrate your data out/away from $abandoned_project. That is the real freedom OSS offers, you are not trapped.
jononor 7y ago
If Canonical goes belly up tomorrow, Ubuntu is likely to continue to work fine for users for a few years. Allowing a slow and gradual migration to another Linux distro.
VvR-Ox 7y ago
1. If Ubuntu fades away you can use another distro (if you want it can still be debian-based) 2. Take a look at Intellij or VS Code - there is no need to use Eclipse anymore 3. "Some linux" tools run on nearly all distros and also you can use a lot of them in mac and windows nowadays The openness of these products enables you to switch more easily because you aren't caught in some walled garden with proprietary file formats etc. that is just what @sivers said (e.g. mysql -> postgres). Consider Pages, Keynote etc. for example which have their own formats. If your mac dies you probably need another one just to open the files again. I saw this with MS office formats, Photoshop and many more. Some people manage to open the files with other (FOSS) tools but most of the time it doens't resemble the original layout because that's why you use proprietary formats in the first place maybe. In the end everything will be replaced some day. Your hardware, software and also file formats and layouts and everything else. In my opinion it's a good precaution to stay with open formats and build software workflows in a modular way so you can easily switch components for specific tasks. It's more work in the first place to get to your ideal workflow and maybe it's also more expensive than some commercial app that happens to provide enough features to build your workflow but you are more resilient to dying / misbehaving companies etc.

by WA 7y ago

UI_at_80x24 7y ago

That's very true (I don't think OP was suggesting otherwise), but what OSS does more then closed-source is give you a way out. 99 times out of 100 there will be an option/method to migrate your data out/away from $abandoned_project. That is the real freedom OSS offers, you are not trapped.

jononor 7y ago

If Canonical goes belly up tomorrow, Ubuntu is likely to continue to work fine for users for a few years. Allowing a slow and gradual migration to another Linux distro.

VvR-Ox 7y ago

1. If Ubuntu fades away you can use another distro (if you want it can still be debian-based) 2. Take a look at Intellij or VS Code - there is no need to use Eclipse anymore 3. "Some linux" tools run on nearly all distros and also you can use a lot of them in mac and windows nowadays The openness of these products enables you to switch more easily because you aren't caught in some walled garden with proprietary file formats etc. that is just what @sivers said (e.g. mysql -> postgres). Consider Pages, Keynote etc. for example which have their own formats. If your mac dies you probably need another one just to open the files again. I saw this with MS office formats, Photoshop and many more. Some people manage to open the files with other (FOSS) tools but most of the time it doens't resemble the original layout because that's why you use proprietary formats in the first place maybe. In the end everything will be replaced some day. Your hardware, software and also file formats and layouts and everything else. In my opinion it's a good precaution to stay with open formats and build software workflows in a modular way so you can easily switch components for specific tasks. It's more work in the first place to get to your ideal workflow and maybe it's also more expensive than some commercial app that happens to provide enough features to build your workflow but you are more resilient to dying / misbehaving companies etc.