7 ms·

Wait, wait, wait... Behind? If you'd asked me, I'd have said that's why open source always seems to be a step ahead! You're under no obligation to do things 'ri

Wait, wait, wait... Behind? If you'd asked me, I'd have said that's why open source always seems to be a step ahead! You're under no obligation to do things 'right', and worse is better. But free software means that you start from scratch much less often. You can take what already works and use it again and again in new products, and so can everyone else. Reusing the core of Linux in a billion small devices seems like a good idea to me.

orev 3y ago
I suspect your perspective is based on using well-established open source projects that have a long history and are popular enough to have reached critical mass. The reality is that most open source projects are playing catch-up, especially in the hardware space. Linux still has many issues with newer GPU drivers (binary blobs instead of actually OSS ones), and even a semi-popular project like OpenWRT doesn’t have WiFi 6E support, even though devices have been out for a while.
jrockway 3y ago
Yeah, especially in this space, open source is miles ahead. HomeKit seems to get worse with every release; HomeAssistant is a much better alternative.
- adhesive_wombat 3y ago
  Only for the software. Most commercial companies in the home automation space are slinging hardware and/or hoovering data. Even Apple is fundamentally selling iPhones here. Open source hardware is a thing but it's genuinely hard and it's a place where the open source iterative building on a rising base idiom doesn't bring such long term dividends because real manufacturing costs real money, and lots of it, and even the best open source electronic designs eventually go out of date when parts EOL. Hardware vendors are reluctant to provide access to run open firmware on their devices because not only then it's a hop, skip and a jump to a clone, inevitably cheaper since the design phase costs a lot, but also they'll lose the device lock-in (e.g. Apple) or app-based data siphon (everyone else).
adhesive_wombat 3y ago
Open source is usually inferior at first, because it's often one guy, or a small group of people doing it after work and at weekends, not a big company piling gobs of money into a full-time team. You usually only get that initial rush in open source when it's a big company driving the project in the first place (LLVM, say). Linux is one of the great examples where FOSS has built up momentum and outrun several commercial competitors. Ditto for git (which actually was a bit "FC" in the first place). GCC and LLVM have between them stomped a few commercial compilers. If you want examples of open source lagging the commercial equivalent: FreeCAD Vs SolidWorks, KiCAD (which is beginning to edge out some competitors: Eagle just went down) vs Altium, GIMP Vs Photoshop, KDEnlive Vs Premiere, Octave Vs MATLAB. Not to say they're not amazing projects, or that they don't have their own share of technical debt, but they'll all have to play the long game to reach the overtake (and they're all decades into the race, so it's a slog). Not being into home automation myself, I can't really comment on open source in this space, but the commercial churn puts the FOSS approach in a good place for the software side. Hardware, not so much.
- eternityforest 3y ago
  All the examples where FOSS is ahead, is in tools by and for programmers. They're acceptable, maybe with an advantage due to cost or lack of cloud subscription stuff, but otherwise not great for the rest. Most everything I like about Linux seems to be driven by the red hat types more than the general community. Home automation software is pretty trivial, HW is what matters, and until very recently the HW was tied to the proprietary software. Plus the software can't rely on you being the product like commercial stuff, so you have to pay for easy remote access on home assistant. The other issue is even though the functionality is simple, two important features are good UI, and not randomly breaking on updates, which FOSS isn't great at. I use FreeCAD, KDEnlive, and others all the time, because the commercial stuff just isn't practical, if you're not making 40k a year or having a company that is tech focused enough to have a license. I'm glad it exists, I'll continue to contribute in GitHub if I see an easy to fix bug..., I'll probably keep using my DIY automation system because of a few specific features, But I'd really rather FOSS do stuff a tiny bit more like commercial does.
- komali2 3y ago
TylerE 3y ago
Sometimes that means it’s 3 decades later and your imagine editing app still doesn’t support CMYK.
- memefrog 3y ago
  If that's such an important feature, feel free to add it.
  - benj111 3y ago
    Well yes. But that isn't an option for most people. I suppose it goes to the heart of what you want open source/free software to be. If you're happy for it to be a niche thing only for 'geeks' that pov is legitimate. If you want the wider world using it then such answers aren't reasonable.
    - memefrog 3y ago
      I don't want it to be anything. Free software is what it is. People work on what they want to work on. Some people make software for others to use. Most, I think, make software for themselves to use. Then you have people making commercial software that they can sell support contracts for. And there are people making free software so they can write academic papers.
      - benj111 3y ago
        >I don't want it to be anything Your comment implicitly indicates a certain world view. Like saying, you don't mind people not working, ignoring the fact there aren't any jobs or unemployment benefits. Ie it's for those that have the ability to write their own code. Or people that have the ability to pay for the specific feature they want. If you're happy with that, fair enough, but that is the implication.
        memefrog 3y ago
        No, your framing is incorrect. Free software is, by its very nature, open for anyone to use or contribute to. If you don't know how to program, then you can learn. You can pay someone to do it, or convince someone to do it some other way. This is how all human relations operate. It is not specific to free software.
barrkel 3y ago
Open Source often takes the shortest available route from A to B, to an MVP which solves a problem for a technical user who doesn't mind duct tape and configuration. The fit and finish required for a non-technical user is frequently neglected, because that's not a itch that an OS contributor needs to scratch. Design is especially neglected. And then there's the long term. OS solutions are not immune to bit rot, forked projects, people getting bored and another solution gaining traction. It can start requiring a higher and higher technical bar (e.g. compiling from source, or applying patches to library dependencies) to keep something old running, when the new stuff requires functionality only available in more recent hardware.
ourmandave 3y ago
But whoo boy, those breaking changes when the author(s) decide to re-architect (i.e. rewrite) the next version.
hot_gril 3y ago
The big players in this space are closed-source, like Ring.

orev 3y ago

I suspect your perspective is based on using well-established open source projects that have a long history and are popular enough to have reached critical mass. The reality is that most open source projects are playing catch-up, especially in the hardware space. Linux still has many issues with newer GPU drivers (binary blobs instead of actually OSS ones), and even a semi-popular project like OpenWRT doesn’t have WiFi 6E support, even though devices have been out for a while.

jrockway 3y ago

Yeah, especially in this space, open source is miles ahead. HomeKit seems to get worse with every release; HomeAssistant is a much better alternative.

adhesive_wombat 3y ago
Only for the software. Most commercial companies in the home automation space are slinging hardware and/or hoovering data. Even Apple is fundamentally selling iPhones here. Open source hardware is a thing but it's genuinely hard and it's a place where the open source iterative building on a rising base idiom doesn't bring such long term dividends because real manufacturing costs real money, and lots of it, and even the best open source electronic designs eventually go out of date when parts EOL. Hardware vendors are reluctant to provide access to run open firmware on their devices because not only then it's a hop, skip and a jump to a clone, inevitably cheaper since the design phase costs a lot, but also they'll lose the device lock-in (e.g. Apple) or app-based data siphon (everyone else).

adhesive_wombat 3y ago

Open source is usually inferior at first, because it's often one guy, or a small group of people doing it after work and at weekends, not a big company piling gobs of money into a full-time team. You usually only get that initial rush in open source when it's a big company driving the project in the first place (LLVM, say). Linux is one of the great examples where FOSS has built up momentum and outrun several commercial competitors. Ditto for git (which actually was a bit "FC" in the first place). GCC and LLVM have between them stomped a few commercial compilers. If you want examples of open source lagging the commercial equivalent: FreeCAD Vs SolidWorks, KiCAD (which is beginning to edge out some competitors: Eagle just went down) vs Altium, GIMP Vs Photoshop, KDEnlive Vs Premiere, Octave Vs MATLAB. Not to say they're not amazing projects, or that they don't have their own share of technical debt, but they'll all have to play the long game to reach the overtake (and they're all decades into the race, so it's a slog). Not being into home automation myself, I can't really comment on open source in this space, but the commercial churn puts the FOSS approach in a good place for the software side. Hardware, not so much.

eternityforest 3y ago
All the examples where FOSS is ahead, is in tools by and for programmers. They're acceptable, maybe with an advantage due to cost or lack of cloud subscription stuff, but otherwise not great for the rest. Most everything I like about Linux seems to be driven by the red hat types more than the general community. Home automation software is pretty trivial, HW is what matters, and until very recently the HW was tied to the proprietary software. Plus the software can't rely on you being the product like commercial stuff, so you have to pay for easy remote access on home assistant. The other issue is even though the functionality is simple, two important features are good UI, and not randomly breaking on updates, which FOSS isn't great at. I use FreeCAD, KDEnlive, and others all the time, because the commercial stuff just isn't practical, if you're not making 40k a year or having a company that is tech focused enough to have a license. I'm glad it exists, I'll continue to contribute in GitHub if I see an easy to fix bug..., I'll probably keep using my DIY automation system because of a few specific features, But I'd really rather FOSS do stuff a tiny bit more like commercial does.
komali2 3y ago

TylerE 3y ago

Sometimes that means it’s 3 decades later and your imagine editing app still doesn’t support CMYK.

memefrog 3y ago
If that's such an important feature, feel free to add it.
- benj111 3y ago
  Well yes. But that isn't an option for most people. I suppose it goes to the heart of what you want open source/free software to be. If you're happy for it to be a niche thing only for 'geeks' that pov is legitimate. If you want the wider world using it then such answers aren't reasonable.
  - memefrog 3y ago
    I don't want it to be anything. Free software is what it is. People work on what they want to work on. Some people make software for others to use. Most, I think, make software for themselves to use. Then you have people making commercial software that they can sell support contracts for. And there are people making free software so they can write academic papers.
    - benj111 3y ago
      >I don't want it to be anything Your comment implicitly indicates a certain world view. Like saying, you don't mind people not working, ignoring the fact there aren't any jobs or unemployment benefits. Ie it's for those that have the ability to write their own code. Or people that have the ability to pay for the specific feature they want. If you're happy with that, fair enough, but that is the implication.
      - memefrog 3y ago
        No, your framing is incorrect. Free software is, by its very nature, open for anyone to use or contribute to. If you don't know how to program, then you can learn. You can pay someone to do it, or convince someone to do it some other way. This is how all human relations operate. It is not specific to free software.

barrkel 3y ago

Open Source often takes the shortest available route from A to B, to an MVP which solves a problem for a technical user who doesn't mind duct tape and configuration. The fit and finish required for a non-technical user is frequently neglected, because that's not a itch that an OS contributor needs to scratch. Design is especially neglected. And then there's the long term. OS solutions are not immune to bit rot, forked projects, people getting bored and another solution gaining traction. It can start requiring a higher and higher technical bar (e.g. compiling from source, or applying patches to library dependencies) to keep something old running, when the new stuff requires functionality only available in more recent hardware.

ourmandave 3y ago

But whoo boy, those breaking changes when the author(s) decide to re-architect (i.e. rewrite) the next version.

hot_gril 3y ago

The big players in this space are closed-source, like Ring.