On Thu, Mar 22, 2007 at 01:04:53PM +0000, Neha Viswanathan wrote: > Many people who use software based on open source, have no idea about open > source . They download because others do, and because it's free. It has > little to do with their ideology, and more to do with what is functional.
yes, but most of the software is produced in a distributed fashion with a high degree of contribution by independent individuals, and all of the software can be modified by any of its users. ideologically khadi was supposed to reduce the consumer-producer barrier (like open source), but in practice it doesn't, not practically and not potentially, and open source does. one reason for this is simply the nature of the end-product, which a software consumer can potentially change and a cloth consumer cannot. another reason is that the ideology of khadi (for cloth) is against economic common sense since cloth is not something that most people want or need adjusted to individual requirements, while software is something they often do (over 70% of software investment is on in-house or custom software). _clothes_ unlike cloth are customised, but (khadi or not) are rarely open source, since altering them typically requires reverse engineering. the quality of this, as anyone who's gone to an indian tailor to alter or create something will attest, is variable. however, clothes, unlike cloth, could potentially be open source - if the stitching patterns were attached in a lable like the cleaning instructions, and stitches were designed to be easily removable. -rishab
