6 ms·

For non-SW engineers, like myself, software is a means, not an end, and FOSS or not FOSS is irrelevant. To get a EDA tool to a useable condition, and debugged

For non-SW engineers, like myself, software is a means, not an end, and FOSS or not FOSS is irrelevant. To get a EDA tool to a useable condition, and debugged to the point where it is reliable enough to actually use, is just a ton of work. As someone who wants to design circuits, why should I do that work? How will it help me design more circuits? I understand why beginners and casual users don't like them because the EDA tools do have a huge learning curve, but once you're there, they are very productive. For professional engineers the software license is not really a significant barrier. Compared to the cost of labor, materials and equipment it's basically a noop.

moooo99 2y ago
> and FOSS or not FOSS is irrelevant. I don’t think this is universally applicable. I think you can differentiate software by how important it is. Some software is at the very core of your business. A CAD, a ECAD, some lab software or a video editing program. Realistically, if you cannot justify the expensive of that software for your business, you probably don’t have a business. Many of those apps require substantial R&D to get right, something you can only afford if you make real money by building it. But there are other supporting applications that are not as close to your value add as your core apps, but they can still sleep you over real bad if the vendor goes bust or raises prices into the sky. That may be a teams chat app, a mail client, a wiki software. Most of those apps are essentially the infrastructure of any business nowadays and are relatively solved problems. In this area OSS really shines and reduces a lot of the vendor risk.
goku12 2y ago
None of the points you make is universally true. FOSS means that there is less of a chance of the rug being pulled from under you in the form of subscription services nobody asked for. This has been a repeated annoyance with one certain company which did that recently for an ECAD tool and an MCAD tool. And, there are enough motivated people who do a ton of work to make FOSS software reliable enough. In fact, MCAD is an exception in that area. We have world class FOSS operating systems, 3D animations systems and development tools in an endless list. Even Blender, which was not very popular a decade ago, suddenly gained recognition. FOSS ECAD is on the way and it will happen some day for FOSS MCAD too. Finally the license cost. The cost of proprietary software - especially engineering and scientific software is exorbitant in countries with better purchase power parity. Much less would happen in those sectors in such places if it weren't for the large repository of FOSS software available to them.
- criddell 2y ago
  > rug being pulled from under you in the form of subscription services nobody asked for Businesses like subscription services. It's all about the cash flow.
  - goku12 2y ago
    That's their excuse. But I don't want to pay a rent for something that doesn't offer anything new over something I already paid for. I'm okay with paying for news, electricity, water, waste collection or even proprietary software as long as it's one-time. But I don't want to pay a rent to keep using heated seats, security cameras or a software without significant updates. That's just pure rent-seeking. That's legalized extortion in my books. Hence my preference for FOSS software.
wink 2y ago
I get that point, and it's the same in some forms of software development. Take IntelliJ IDEA, it's been around for ages, it's commercial, and it mostly works and thus it's been the default choice for many orgs. But you can't patch it yourself. If anything breaks at your org, you just use another IDE for a week. No big deal. But that's the thing about open source software you run in production - you don't need one of a dozen enlightened people on the planet who understand it, most often, you will find one on your team who is competent enough to backport a fix, or come up with a fix after debugging it. I see it as more of a safety access hatch.

moooo99 2y ago

> and FOSS or not FOSS is irrelevant. I don’t think this is universally applicable. I think you can differentiate software by how important it is. Some software is at the very core of your business. A CAD, a ECAD, some lab software or a video editing program. Realistically, if you cannot justify the expensive of that software for your business, you probably don’t have a business. Many of those apps require substantial R&D to get right, something you can only afford if you make real money by building it. But there are other supporting applications that are not as close to your value add as your core apps, but they can still sleep you over real bad if the vendor goes bust or raises prices into the sky. That may be a teams chat app, a mail client, a wiki software. Most of those apps are essentially the infrastructure of any business nowadays and are relatively solved problems. In this area OSS really shines and reduces a lot of the vendor risk.

goku12 2y ago

None of the points you make is universally true. FOSS means that there is less of a chance of the rug being pulled from under you in the form of subscription services nobody asked for. This has been a repeated annoyance with one certain company which did that recently for an ECAD tool and an MCAD tool. And, there are enough motivated people who do a ton of work to make FOSS software reliable enough. In fact, MCAD is an exception in that area. We have world class FOSS operating systems, 3D animations systems and development tools in an endless list. Even Blender, which was not very popular a decade ago, suddenly gained recognition. FOSS ECAD is on the way and it will happen some day for FOSS MCAD too. Finally the license cost. The cost of proprietary software - especially engineering and scientific software is exorbitant in countries with better purchase power parity. Much less would happen in those sectors in such places if it weren't for the large repository of FOSS software available to them.

criddell 2y ago
> rug being pulled from under you in the form of subscription services nobody asked for Businesses like subscription services. It's all about the cash flow.
- goku12 2y ago
  That's their excuse. But I don't want to pay a rent for something that doesn't offer anything new over something I already paid for. I'm okay with paying for news, electricity, water, waste collection or even proprietary software as long as it's one-time. But I don't want to pay a rent to keep using heated seats, security cameras or a software without significant updates. That's just pure rent-seeking. That's legalized extortion in my books. Hence my preference for FOSS software.

wink 2y ago

I get that point, and it's the same in some forms of software development. Take IntelliJ IDEA, it's been around for ages, it's commercial, and it mostly works and thus it's been the default choice for many orgs. But you can't patch it yourself. If anything breaks at your org, you just use another IDE for a week. No big deal. But that's the thing about open source software you run in production - you don't need one of a dozen enlightened people on the planet who understand it, most often, you will find one on your team who is competent enough to backport a fix, or come up with a fix after debugging it. I see it as more of a safety access hatch.