9 ms·

> FOSS was founded on the principles of openness and collaboration, something that we need now more than ever, as the largest companies of the world have manage

> FOSS was founded on the principles of openness and collaboration, something that we need now more than ever, as the largest companies of the world have managed to weaken that resolve through slick marketing and anti-competitive practices. Some of the best open source software was developed, open sourced and maintained by the largest companies of the world. >Think of what truly open VR headsets, smartwatches, tablets and smartphones etc. would be capable of, the rich ecosystem of apps and capabilities that could exist - but greed is literally holding us back by decades. Do you think an open source group could build an Apple watch? > That Linux has not only survived for so long, but thrived, is a true testament to the will, technical expertise, and product vision of community developers. That Linux is still mostly used as a server OS, and not as a viable OS by the general public is a true testament that there are things that matter to people that community developers don't care about. >Think of the kids growing up now, forced to be consumers rather than producers. And compare them to the last century, the sense of wonder and expression that the internet and infinitely hackable devices brought. Techie kids growing up now are on average an order of magnitudes better than their equivalent from last century. As a matter of fact, there are more great and creative coders nowadays compared to any time in history. Just look at the amount of open source projects on github. Idealism that is as far disconnected from reality as yours is one of the issues plaguing FOSS today. I have no idea how your comment can be as upvoted as it is - maybe selection bias based on the nature of the article. It is still concerning though.

stcredzero 3y ago
Idealism that is as far disconnected from reality as yours is one of the issues plaguing FOSS today. Let's unpack this even more. A quite potent problem, is when something else is posing as or sneaking into activism and movements like Open Source and FOSS. This something else can take the form of cliques, hipsterism, or the use of movements to vent anger or aggression. The best way to hurt a cause is to represent it badly. > FOSS was founded on the principles of openness and collaboration, something that we need now more than ever, as the largest companies of the world have managed to weaken that resolve through slick marketing and anti-competitive practices. Some of the best open source software was developed, open sourced and maintained by the largest companies of the world. Scapegoating people and groups merely by taxonomy has had a bad record across history. Hold people and companies to account for the things they do, not for their characteristics. That's the only fair form of accountability.
y04nn 3y ago
> Do you think an open source group could build an Apple watch? Surely not, but Apple could have worked on integrating and participating to the development of an open source software for the Apple watch. In another world, MeeGo[1] would have take off and we would use it on every smartphones (no iOS/Android incompatibility), every car systems, every tablets, every smart watches and everything would work seamlessly. Hardware manufacturers would concentrate on hardware and we would be able to buy the hardware we want and it would connect every devices we already own. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MeeGo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MeeGo
- Draiken 3y ago
  Why not? It's a question of resources. If you put the equivalent money into open source instead, why would they not do it? I find these claims that only private entities can build quality completely unfounded. It's all about resources.
fragmede 3y ago
> That Linux is still mostly used as a server OS, and not as a viable OS by the general public is a true testament that there are things that matter to people that community developers don't care about. Given the success of Android, I'm not sure how true that is, but ignoring that, the success of Chromebooks says something, but ignoring that, the fact that I can't wander into best buy and get a laptop with Ubuntu preinstalled is what makes the vast majority people end up with Windows laptops, and then some small percent with MacOS, not some holy testament against the viability of Linux as a desktop operating system.
- superb_dev 3y ago
  From a quick google, here are the actual market share numbers: Windows ~70% MacOS ~15% Linux ~5% https://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share/desktop/worldwide https://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share/desktop/worldwide
- DeusExMachina 3y ago
  The success of Android and Chromebooks is because of the investments of a for-profit multi-billion company.
  - Narishma 3y ago
    That's no different from the success of Windows or iOS or Playstation or what have you.
  - nickpsecurity 3y ago
    I think it was originally VC-funded company whose code was copyleft. Google acquired them. It’s probably still a huge, open-source ecosystem because of the copyleft license.
- tredre3 3y ago
  The fact that Chromebooks are a success is, if anything, the true testament that there are things that matter to people that (desktop linux) community developers don't care about.
TaylorAlexander 3y ago
> Do you think an open source group could build an Apple watch? Apple Watch? Depends on what you mean by that but they 100% could build a smartwatch, such as the open source $27 Pinetime watch: https://wiki.pine64.org/index.php/PineTime https://wiki.pine64.org/index.php/PineTime https://pine64.com/product/pinetime-smartwatch-sealed/ https://pine64.com/product/pinetime-smartwatch-sealed/
- Karrot_Kream 3y ago
  Indeed, case in point. The Apple Watch was first released on 2015-04-24. The PineTime was announced on 2019-10-05. If it requires 4.5 years of commercial success for a FOSS competitor to be announced, well, FOSS certainly isn't pushing that product development envelope. It's a common pattern. Linux GUIs only came about once other commercially successful GUIs existed. The Linux Desktop was a reaction to the commercial success of Windows and Apple desktops. FOSS often ends up cloning existing successful products. Of course there's nothing wrong with creating open alternatives after the fact, but to pretend that FOSS is driving product vision is disconnected idealism at its finest.
  - TaylorAlexander 3y ago
    Sure but for this discussion this feels like moving the goalposts. Is it possible for FOSS to make a smartwatch? The answer is yes. Apple tends not to lead product categories either, letting companies like Samsung and Meta try new features before they are proven. That’s more a development strategy than a limitation on what FOSS can do. Look at 3D printers, which exploded in popularity in the OSS world after the patents expired. Yes a commercial company made them first, but the wealth of experimentation on new price points and features happened in the FOSS world.
    - robertlagrant 3y ago
      The root comment of this thread is all about demonising companies and lionising open source. That's why this discussion isn't moving the goalposts. You've moved them to "OSS can also do this" which is not where it started.
margana 3y ago
> Do you think an open source group could build an Apple watch? This is such a dishonest argument. Which part of the parent post talked about building hardware? It's all about the hardware being open to run any software without artificial limitations, and providing the documentation to interface with the hardware. An open source group could definitely build an operating system and software for an Apple watch. I can't believe you try to call someone else disconnected from reality and idealistic when you engage them in such a malicious, dishonest way.
geraldhh 3y ago
Capitalism that is as far disconnected from reality as yours is one of the issues plaguing FOSS today. I have no idea how your comment can be as upvoted as it is - maybe selection bias based on the nature of the article. It is still concerning though.

stcredzero 3y ago

Idealism that is as far disconnected from reality as yours is one of the issues plaguing FOSS today. Let's unpack this even more. A quite potent problem, is when something else is posing as or sneaking into activism and movements like Open Source and FOSS. This something else can take the form of cliques, hipsterism, or the use of movements to vent anger or aggression. The best way to hurt a cause is to represent it badly. > FOSS was founded on the principles of openness and collaboration, something that we need now more than ever, as the largest companies of the world have managed to weaken that resolve through slick marketing and anti-competitive practices. Some of the best open source software was developed, open sourced and maintained by the largest companies of the world. Scapegoating people and groups merely by taxonomy has had a bad record across history. Hold people and companies to account for the things they do, not for their characteristics. That's the only fair form of accountability.

y04nn 3y ago

> Do you think an open source group could build an Apple watch? Surely not, but Apple could have worked on integrating and participating to the development of an open source software for the Apple watch. In another world, MeeGo[1] would have take off and we would use it on every smartphones (no iOS/Android incompatibility), every car systems, every tablets, every smart watches and everything would work seamlessly. Hardware manufacturers would concentrate on hardware and we would be able to buy the hardware we want and it would connect every devices we already own. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MeeGo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MeeGo

Draiken 3y ago
Why not? It's a question of resources. If you put the equivalent money into open source instead, why would they not do it? I find these claims that only private entities can build quality completely unfounded. It's all about resources.

fragmede 3y ago

> That Linux is still mostly used as a server OS, and not as a viable OS by the general public is a true testament that there are things that matter to people that community developers don't care about. Given the success of Android, I'm not sure how true that is, but ignoring that, the success of Chromebooks says something, but ignoring that, the fact that I can't wander into best buy and get a laptop with Ubuntu preinstalled is what makes the vast majority people end up with Windows laptops, and then some small percent with MacOS, not some holy testament against the viability of Linux as a desktop operating system.

superb_dev 3y ago
From a quick google, here are the actual market share numbers: Windows ~70% MacOS ~15% Linux ~5% https://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share/desktop/worldwide https://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share/desktop/worldwide
DeusExMachina 3y ago
The success of Android and Chromebooks is because of the investments of a for-profit multi-billion company.
- Narishma 3y ago
  That's no different from the success of Windows or iOS or Playstation or what have you.
- nickpsecurity 3y ago
  I think it was originally VC-funded company whose code was copyleft. Google acquired them. It’s probably still a huge, open-source ecosystem because of the copyleft license.
tredre3 3y ago
The fact that Chromebooks are a success is, if anything, the true testament that there are things that matter to people that (desktop linux) community developers don't care about.

TaylorAlexander 3y ago

> Do you think an open source group could build an Apple watch? Apple Watch? Depends on what you mean by that but they 100% could build a smartwatch, such as the open source $27 Pinetime watch: https://wiki.pine64.org/index.php/PineTime https://wiki.pine64.org/index.php/PineTime https://pine64.com/product/pinetime-smartwatch-sealed/ https://pine64.com/product/pinetime-smartwatch-sealed/

Karrot_Kream 3y ago
Indeed, case in point. The Apple Watch was first released on 2015-04-24. The PineTime was announced on 2019-10-05. If it requires 4.5 years of commercial success for a FOSS competitor to be announced, well, FOSS certainly isn't pushing that product development envelope. It's a common pattern. Linux GUIs only came about once other commercially successful GUIs existed. The Linux Desktop was a reaction to the commercial success of Windows and Apple desktops. FOSS often ends up cloning existing successful products. Of course there's nothing wrong with creating open alternatives after the fact, but to pretend that FOSS is driving product vision is disconnected idealism at its finest.
- TaylorAlexander 3y ago
  Sure but for this discussion this feels like moving the goalposts. Is it possible for FOSS to make a smartwatch? The answer is yes. Apple tends not to lead product categories either, letting companies like Samsung and Meta try new features before they are proven. That’s more a development strategy than a limitation on what FOSS can do. Look at 3D printers, which exploded in popularity in the OSS world after the patents expired. Yes a commercial company made them first, but the wealth of experimentation on new price points and features happened in the FOSS world.
  - robertlagrant 3y ago
    The root comment of this thread is all about demonising companies and lionising open source. That's why this discussion isn't moving the goalposts. You've moved them to "OSS can also do this" which is not where it started.

margana 3y ago

> Do you think an open source group could build an Apple watch? This is such a dishonest argument. Which part of the parent post talked about building hardware? It's all about the hardware being open to run any software without artificial limitations, and providing the documentation to interface with the hardware. An open source group could definitely build an operating system and software for an Apple watch. I can't believe you try to call someone else disconnected from reality and idealistic when you engage them in such a malicious, dishonest way.

geraldhh 3y ago

Capitalism that is as far disconnected from reality as yours is one of the issues plaguing FOSS today. I have no idea how your comment can be as upvoted as it is - maybe selection bias based on the nature of the article. It is still concerning though.