On 5 September 2012 09:31, dE <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wednesday, September 5, 2012 7:49:01 AM UTC+5:30, John Coryat wrote: >> >> >> Developers who code for opensource software, have interest in coding; >> >> it's not about money >> >> It's always about money, unless you're a hobbyist. Any endeavor that isn't >> self sustaining is doomed to failure. Open source works because people use >> it to make money. Sure, developers also contribute selflessly to such >> projects. They also need to feed themselves and unless they earn money from >> those efforts, they eventually have to move on to something that will. >> > > What I meant was that, if you're a hobbyist and are paid for an opensource > project which you like to develop (commonly, a former developer) or even if > you're doing it as a contribution, then the resultant code quality is a lot > better than devs who code solely for money.
Firstly code quality is a very nebulous term and means different things depending on the context. The assertion that when something is being done for money rather than as a hobby lowers the quality of said work (whichever way you understand quality) is false. Look at any mission critical software (medical, car safety systems, nuclear power station management) and try to have it delivered by hobbyists. To expand the argument further, look at professional sports vs. amateur sports. It is true that hobbyists have more enthusiasm and energy, but they usually lack efficiencies and best practices of professional setups. > Finally, why will one be > interested in developing solely for the profit of a company? Might sound controversial, but people do work for their employers benefit, because they are being rewarded for their work. I work, they pay. Simple as that. Money however is only one side of the coin. If I have a choice and do either bad work or good work for the same pay (lets assume that my effort and my expense are the same in both cases), why would I ever choose to do bad work? I would be doing disservice only to myself, lowering my standards, becoming complacent and lazy, eventually to lose my enthusiasm about anything to do with my work. Work being big part of our modern lives, this bad blood would spill outside of work too. Or I could do a good job, or perhaps the best job that I can, and be more satisfied about my work and life in general. I could try to learn how to deliver best possible product within constraints of commercial development and in general contribute to the pool of positive energy floating around. The choice is yours. Problem is that few managers and few workers can see things like that. I am all for OSS and am not advocating against it at all, but arguments for or against it require a bit more effort I think. Both sides can learn from each other. However this discussion became very OT. Patent system does not deal with the complexity and esoteric nature of software at all and normal human greed drives people to start patenting everything or trolling left, right and centre. -- Daniel Drozdzewski -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Discuss" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-discuss?hl=en.
