Open source and closed source approaches to developing operating systems - Research Paper Example

Approaches to Developing Operating Systems Approaches to Developing Operating Systems Open source software is the software, which allow for sharing, modifying, distributing and viewing of code of the computer by other persons or entities. Closed software, on the other hand, is restricted to private use only. The two sources of software differ in terms of their innovation, security, usability, and cost and in the provision of supporting service. Regarding cost, open source software requires relatively low costs in its implementation and training.

It requires careful technical management of its content. Amongst the costs that persists while using open source software are those of implementing it, funding innovation, servicing, and expansion (Donaldson & Siegel, 2000). Those who provide open source add-ons and integration are increasing their charges with time. This has made the cost of owning open source software to be at par with those of closed source alternatives. The cost of closed source software depends on the sophistication of the option.

This cost compounds a base charge for the software, license, service and integration. The closed source software has trusted security, steady innovation and does not need a lot of technical training. It allows for exclusive customization and has a higher degree of functionality. Their websites are highly available relative to open source software. These elements warrant the relatively high costs of closed source software. Open source software counts on the online usage so as to give support through blogs and other avenues (Mu?nch, 2012).

Closed source software is high on service and support. Providers of closed source software are able to support their customers continually. They do so to supplement the use of manuals and in instances where a user is unable to utilize the manuals. Closed source software companies have workers who are reliably knowledgeable in their products, and this gives them a cutting edge on their delivery of service. As a result of the advantage of service that proprietary software enjoy over its counterpart, competition is stiff between proprietary software companies and this adds on to better service provision.

Open source software enjoys the benefit of flexibility which allows customers to use the software according to their convenience. Innovation in open source software though is individualized and may not reach all of its users. It follows then that unless persons who use this software take it upon themselves to look out for innovation, they may never know of its existence. Studies have suggested that changes to a computer code by an open source software user may restrict the future support and may tamper with the advancement of the software.

Users of closed source software do not have the freedom to modify the original computer code. Regardless of the view that this could be disadvantageous, it helps secure the authenticity of the software (Acuna & Juristo, 2005). Proprietary software suppliers can assist certain clients to customize the software to suit the demands. They also provide new products and upgrade their customers’ software. Online customers of closed source software give feedbacks and share ideas. This provides avenues for innovation and modification of the products with respect to the dynamic needs of the customers.

When there is an innovation it is made available to all clients. In most cases, the technology involved in production of open source software is not tested by experts. This has made it be accused of lack of usability. Its idiosyncratic production requires knowledge and skills to modify languages of programming lest it becomes difficult to correct errors. As it does not commonly utilize guides and manuals, these important items are not readily available. The documentation available for open source software is not sufficient to enlighten lay users.

Closed source software is tested promptly by experts before distribution (Donaldson & Siegel, 2000). It also has relatively specified users for whom it is specially made, and this builds on its usability. Proprietary software provides guides and manuals that are comprehensive and readily available. This effects clients’ learning and serves as a reference. Proprietary software companies conduct support services through training and seminars to effect better utility of the product. Increasingly, closed software companies are allowing teams of qualified individuals and agencies to modify the product.

In terms of security, open source software is developed by individuals who may not necessarily take it to completion. This poses a threat to the comprehensive communication about the software. Unscrupulous programmers can access users’ information without the knowledge of the users. The expertise needed to verify and analyze the source code is high. Open source software companies would need to put together teams of highly qualified individuals that would work with the support of online users, to mitigate the risk of fraudsters (Mu?nch, 2012).

Closed source software is developed by highly qualified teams who work harmoniously in controlled environments. In proprietary software, the computer code can only be viewed by these qualified individuals. This eliminates the risk of imprudent access of users’ information unknowingly. Software licensing regulates the use, modification and distribution of software. It makes the contract between the software developer and the user binding. Without licenses, software users would not know the restrictions attached to the software and developers would have a hard time regulating the way in which their products are used.

There are different types of software licenses. Proprietary licenses restrict the ways persons can use the software with regards to the rights of the business owner (Classen & American Bar Association, 2005). It prescribes the use of the software by a single user and prohibits redistribution, alteration, copying and derivatives of a person’s work. Products covered by proprietary license are in binary form with prohibition of examining source code unless during inspection. Free and open source software licensing allows flexibility in the use, distribution and innovation of software.

Many of these licenses differ in some aspects, but they all allow non-discriminatory use and modification of software. Hybrid software licensing combines free and open source software license with proprietary license. This differs from the other two in that the person with the rights over the software decides what to restrict and what to allow even in individual cases. This is meant to meet the demands of a situation where neither the free and open source software license nor proprietary license can individually fulfill (Gordon, 2008).

In the language of software licensing, permissive licenses are those that have few limitations and that allow indiscriminate dissemination of software requiring only that one acknowledges the developer of the software. Education Community License (ECL) and MIT are examples of permissive licenses. There are some licenses that use copyleft licenses. Copyleft requires that derivatives of other people’s works be disseminated under the same conditions of the original work. Although they are commonly regarded as restrictive, they allow perpetual access to the works of others.

General Public License (GPL), Mozilla Public License (MPL) and Lesser General Public License (LGPL) are examples of copyleft licenses (Classen & American Bar Association, 2005). The terms of copyleft license are also referred to as reciprocity provisions or requirements. Different copyleft has varying degrees of reciprocity, and General Public License has the highest degree of reciprocity. References Acuna, S. T., & Juristo, N. (2005). Software Process Modeling. New York: Springer Science+Business Media, Inc.

Classen, H. W., & American Bar Association. (2005). A practical guide to software licensing for licensees and licensors analyses and model forms: Analyses and model forms. Chicago, IL: American Bar Association, Section of Business Law. Donaldson, S. E., & Siegel, S. G. (2000). Successful software development. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall PTR. Gordon, J. I. (2008). Software licensing handbook. Raleigh, NC: Lulu. Mu?nch, J. (2012). Software process definition and management. Berlin: Springer.