[ba-ohs-talk] open source question
I'm trying to understand the reasoning why some/many/most/few(?)
people believe that a broadly adopted / adoptable OHS
should/could/must(?) be licensed under an Open Source license, and I
would appreciate your insights, either to the list or to me
individually. (01)
Here are some reasons that are commonly mentioned on why Open Source
vs. something else. Which ones are the uniquely important ones as it
relates to OHS? What am I missing? (I am interested in the arguments
unique to OHS, not a general open-source discussion of which we all
have seen too many before ;-)) (02)
1) Open Source software tends to have less bugs and be more secure
that Closed Source because of the constant source code peer review.
(the "quality argument") (03)
2) Open Source products are more innovative because more brains with
more backgrounds can add more new, innovative things to the product
more quickly than possible if one vendor keeps control. (the
"innovation argument") (04)
3) Open Source products can be distributed for free, and thus can be
used by users/organizations that cannot afford the purchase / license
of non-free software. (the "price argument") (05)
4) Open Source products will not, ever, "go out of business" like a
traditional software company or an unprofitable product line can.
(the "no dead-end argument") (06)
I mostly hear the price argument in the context of OHS, but that
can't be all of it -- just changing the list price in different
countries, or for different purchasers (e.g. schools) would solve
that issue as well, and does not necessarily imply Open Source. So
what is it about OHS that requires Open Source? I appreciate your
insights ... (07)
Cheers, (08)
Johannes Ernst
R-Objects Inc. (09)