spreading the message
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| Libervis Jul 13, 2006 4:16 PM EDT |
While I realize this story was already put to digg.com, I also realize it didn't get far. So I resubmit it with a different and possibly more engaging description. Getting it to homepage is a nice way to spreading such a clear message about Free Software that this story provides. If you agree, digg it: http://digg.com/linux_unix/The_Value_of_Free_Software_2 ;) |
| grouch Jul 13, 2006 7:06 PM EDT |
Libervis: The story was rejected by Slashdot, when I submitted it. I've read the article 3 or 4 times, just because it's so damned cool. Do people seem to think only the extremes matter with free software? Either big corps must pay full-time programmers to do GPL code, or coders must do it strictly on spare time? Here we have: * a relatively small group (note the 10 PCs), * with a big software itch, * for a feature in GPL software, * that has been asked for by others for 5 years, * a FOSS developer able and willing to * code the feature for a fee, * which answers the 5 years worth of requests because of the GPL, * and the instigator (yeah, that's you, Don) shares the tale with the world so others can see how to get their software itches scratched, even if they can't afford a full-time programmer. What's not to like? It is a concrete illustration of one of the benefits of free software that advocates have pointed out for years. We've all read news stories of how some business extended some piece of free software, or how some hacker extended some piece. This story is part of that vast middle ground which has been almost totally ignored in the news. I want to put it in billboard-sized type: YOU, TOO, ARE FREE TO ADVANCE FREE SOFTWARE TO FIT YOUR NEEDS! It's not just IBM, Novell, Red Hat, etc., inc. who has that freedom. It's not just hackers who have that freedom. *Every* user, individual to multi-national corporation, has that freedom with free software! |
| dinotrac Jul 13, 2006 7:08 PM EDT |
Don't feel bad about being rejected by /.. I think they're all sulky now that they're not cool any more. |
| tuxchick2 Jul 13, 2006 7:24 PM EDT |
/. and other OSTG properties are running 'Get the Facts' ads now, so they are most definitely uncool. I digged it. |
| dinotrac Jul 13, 2006 7:35 PM EDT |
>I digged it. Hee Hee. Reminds me of our friends the Wolf family. I sometimes refer to them as the Wolves, but Wolfs is grammatically correct. Just don't seem right though, do it? |
| grouch Jul 13, 2006 7:35 PM EDT |
tuxchick2: I never see those ads anymore. Usually, I see lots of whitespace on pages or I get a 404 message from my local apache, all crammed into an ad box. Seems the ad doesn't exist on localhost. :o) |
| Libervis Jul 13, 2006 8:19 PM EDT |
This story is such a beautiful proof of a working Free Software economy that ought to shatter the last doubts about Free Software as an economic system. I mean, one of the most asked questions regarding Free Software is still that; how do programmers make money?! This story shows how! Custom coding. I can bet there is a huge number of people out there badly need a certain feature or a program and would gladly pay to get it. That's probably the biggest money making opportunity all Free Software programmers have. Code on demand for money while sharping up your skills on pet projects you do for free. In the end all code get's to the community as Free Software, a programmer earns a living, and those who need specific features and programs have their needs satisfied. Awesome. :) Btw, I've featured the story on Libervis too, a bit late, but I haven't read the story immediately and bookmarked for later so there.. [url=http://www.libervis.com/news article.storyid 307.htm]http://www.libervis.com/news article.storyid 307.htm[/url] Thanks |
| grouch Jul 13, 2006 8:47 PM EDT |
Libervis: MS and other secret source brick packagers may get all the drooling space in the "news", but custom coding accounts for far more software and far more developer jobs than all the shrink-wrap. There are some developers who are paid to work on free software, but most developers are paid to create custom, unreleased, business-specific software that will never be seen in public. What you describe is a very fine cottage industry opportunity that is under-utilized, or at least under-reported, currently. It could be a way for new FOSS coders to get exposure while providing features users desire enough to be willing to pay to get. The feature-for-hire scenario does not involve the typical corporate ladder of economic success. Developers do not have to follow that serial, step-oriented model. The required level of expertise and fee are entirely up to the negotiating user and developer. Free software enables small business opportunities: * local Mom&Pop PC shops selling computers with GNU/Linux installed and customized for local customers * service and support business, from the neighborhood part-timer taking care of local businesses and neighbors, to IBM, Red Hat and Novell * developers of custom, unreleased software are free to do their creating on free software, with GNU/Linux in particular lowering that cost barrier to entry * as illustrated by Don's article, developers can negotiate directly with users to do custom work on free software for a fee Free software is not just for saving on the expense side of the ledger. I'm looking forward to mainline news discovering lots of cottage industry springing up around FOSS. Setting users free is truly awesome, when it is understood who the group "users" includes and just how free those 4 freedoms make them. |
| Libervis Jul 14, 2006 3:42 AM EDT |
Indeed grouch, and this is a core point people ought to understand:Quoting:Setting users free is truly awesome, when it is understood who the group "users" includes and just how free those 4 freedoms make them. When people see that developers are also inevitably users, then they should see that when speaking of freedom of users we're speaking of freedom for developers, which as you well explained reflects in various opportunities they have, that they may not have had in a realm of proprietary software. And it all comes from the ability to cooperate rather the need for secrecy and isolation. Thanks |
| NoDough Jul 14, 2006 6:18 AM EDT |
I hate to throw cold water on this dream, but I don't think this is a feasible economic model for a programmer. In order to make a living at this, a developer would have to find at least 150 engagements per year like this one (150 x US$400 = US$60,000). To make a decent living with which to support a family, the number would be more like 200 per year (200 x US$400 = US$80,000). If you assume two weeks of vacation, and ten holidays per year, that leaves 240 working days. So, every engagement would have to be found, sold, scoped, completed, debugged, and delivered in a day and a half or less (240 days / 150 engagements = 1.6 days) (240 days / 200 engagements = 1.2 days). Additionally, this self-employed programmer would have to pay their own benefits. Insurance, saving for retirement, etc. take a big bite of the income pie. Also, self-employment tax is a killer. Programmers are far better off looking for work that will keep them busy for weeks or months at a time. However, individuals or small organizations aren't likely to be able to fund such work (2 weeks = 80 hours; 80 x US$40/hour = US$3,200) (2 months = 320 hours; 320 x US$40/hour = US$12,800). It's a good second income, but I personally wouldn't pursue it for a full-time occupation. |
| grouch Jul 14, 2006 6:26 AM EDT |
NoDough: Your splash of cold water warms up as you adjust your figures to account for cost of living in various places. That US$60K you first quote might put you in a flop-house in NYC, but it would lure some teachers out of classrooms in several states. There are plenty of places where half that would be a ticket to riches. Even considering that, your point is well-taken. Such a business model is not a replacement for, say, getting a job as a kernel hacker at IBM. |
| tuxchick2 Jul 14, 2006 7:10 AM EDT |
Save the cold water, I think you're looking at the wrong business model. Developing and supporting custom applications is the way to go for a freelancer, not these little one-off feature fixes. Two areas that are big for small businesses are point-of-sale and accounting. For most folks one size does not fit all, and even if they use off-the-shelf retail apps they require a substantial amount of customization. Even popular commercial apps like Peachtree and Quickbooks have a whole customization-and-support industry built up around them. Other accounting and retail management packages (sorry, I forget the names now, but there's a lot of them) are designed to require a custom installation, setup, and ongoing maintenance. On my todo-list-when-I-have-time is to investigate the FOSS options for this sort of thing, because I think it has some real opportunities. |
| NoDough Jul 14, 2006 7:18 AM EDT |
TC, Agreed. Perhaps I was ambiguous in what I addressed. I was speaking of the "one-off feature fixes." |
| grouch Jul 14, 2006 7:27 AM EDT |
tuxchick2: I tried for years to get someone to code a GUI replacement for a critical part of a local business's billing and customer data management needs. One programmer probably summed up the problem well, "That kind of SQL work is just not sexy." I had to limp along with a conglomerated mess utilizing PHP, Mozilla, PostgreSQL, an old flat-file dbms, and a 2517 line bash script. They never knew how ugly things were behind that PHP+Mozilla face they saw. |
| shreyas Jul 14, 2006 7:57 AM EDT |
NoDough: Interestingly the way economies work, If i were to earn $60k in India i would probably be in top 1% (multiply $60k with 46 to get INR number) of the employed bracket for people with similar work experience. Having said that i dont know one person (i know fair number of open source developers) who depend on such pay-off's for existence. I work on a lot of stuff out of pure interest anyway, if someone wants something specific done which aligns to what i am doing, then i pick it up. |
| tuxchick2 Jul 14, 2006 8:14 AM EDT |
grouch, I know what you mean. I've been self-employed most of my life, and the one thing that set me apart from the competition was customer service. It doesn't matter what profession you're in, that's the single biggest factor to being successful. A lot of freelancers have this idea that being the boss means doing whatever you want. And strictly speaking it does, unless what you want is to have contented loyal customers and good word-of-mouth referrals. Customers totally do not care what you want- they hire help to have their own needs met, which is a basic concept that escapes a surprisingly large number of entrepeneurs. BTW, I keep forgetting to mention that $400 seems like a real bargain for the amount of time Shreyas put in. |
| grouch Jul 14, 2006 8:50 AM EDT |
It really was a bargain for everyone involved. Shreyas mentioned somewhere that it wasn't that big a deal, but it was for those of us who can't do real coding. |
| NoDough Jul 14, 2006 8:57 AM EDT |
shreyas, I didn't in any way intend to minimize the importance and impact of your work. Your dedication and talent are respected, admired, and appreciated. Many here in the states are upset about the amount of work going to India. I am not among them. America has a higher standard of living than most of the rest of the world. If we have to trim our budgets so that poorer countries (I don't know if India fits that description today, but I believe it once did) can raise their standard of living... well I think that's only fair. Thank you for your contributions (paid for and otherwise) to the free and open source software communities. |
| jimf Jul 14, 2006 9:05 AM EDT |
> It really was a bargain for everyone involved. Shreyas mentioned somewhere that it wasn't that big a deal, but it was for those of us who can't do real coding. I agree, and, can strongly relate to that. Don did a nice job in telling us about it. |
| Libervis Jul 14, 2006 9:39 AM EDT |
The response to NoDoughs original "cold water" argument was well made already so I'll just add that I'd be happy to be payed $400 dollars for adding a specific feature to a program if I knew how to do that. In Croatia that's more than a double of monthly sallary of which one guy can actually live off pretty good. That reduces these 160 necessary deals NoDough talks about to 24 (two a month for an average Croatian salary). But who says this has to be the only source of income. Many of these programmers will have a pet project for which they can have a website. Depending on the popularity of their program they can sell some advertising off that website. They can even go further and commercialize a bit on that pet project by offering support services for it, selling a CD package or even (if you want to go that far) charge for a download of the latest version of a program (as phpnuke guy used to do, and still does I think). Anyway, my point is simply that we don't need proprietary software for programmers to be able to make a decent living. I can understand why some Free Software programmers work for a proprietary software company today, but that's just because we haven't yet achieved domination. As Free Software mind shares and market shares continue to grow, so will its economic opportunities. There is no reason to save even the smallest piece for proprietary software - it's a model that should be killed and be done with, even if the killing will take some time. ;) Thanks |
| grouch Jul 14, 2006 9:47 AM EDT |
Libervis: A bit of back-up for your point: Quoting: Let's go to myth number two: Linux is only a niche play. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!