The 'free software on a Mac' developer paradox

By Jeremy Fain, June 11, 2007

Many software developers I meet claim to be ‘free software guys’, who use open source integrated development environments and hack code in PHP, Java or Ruby exclusively, and possess Macs exclusively as well. I guess that’s a pretty well-identified profile in software development circles.

I respect their belief that open source and sharing and collaboration is an entertaining and exciting way to develop software. And actually I find there are good (innovation, quality & security pressure on existing players) and bad (constraint to new venture opportunities in the software industry) points about open source / free software (assuming there’s no difference, although there are). However, if their choice, as they claim it to be, often is a protest move against Microsoft and commercial software in general, then why the heck do they all have a Macintosh laptop? Apple to me is the epitome of a “closed environment”.

Finding, as I do, Mac hardware beautiful (although it has shortcomings like weight and heat) & Mac software really user friendly would be a good reason to use it. But claiming to protest again commercial software on the one hand , while on the other hand purchasing and using Macs is in my opinion totally ridiculous.

In fact, this situation of having open source-addicts use the closest platform from the most secretive computer company ever, is so paradoxical that I believe there’s something more gregarious than genuine about it. These people want to look “cool” - and that’s more important to them than being consistent with their ideas. Fine with me.

Related posts:

  1. Hugo Chávez and Free Software
  2. Open source constraints entrepreneurship
  3. A Network Mapping Software – perhaps my University project this year. Inputs most welcome.
  4. Catching up on software and entrepreneurship books
  5. Developer to all-technical-staff ratio: 1:4 as a rule of thumb?

categories Apple, Consumer electronics, Education, Entertainment, Entrepreneurship, Friends, Java, Microsoft, Organization, SME, Silicon Valley, Software, innovation, open-source, operations, retail

  • On the other hand, you can run almost any linux distribution on Macs (Power PC as well as MacIntel). Indeed yes, you have lots of open source addicts installing Ubuntu or Debian



    And OSX is based on Darwin kernel which should be kind of open source (i don't know the exact license, but the source is available)



    And Mac laptops are not just cool, but still have the best quality/size/autonomy/price ratio



    (since my 1st g4 ibook :))
  • Hum... I would bet you're confusing Mac OS and Apple computers.



    Most of the guys running Free Software on a Mac, or not using Mac Os X, but rather Ubuntu, or Debian or any Linux flavor they like! They are using a perfectly integrated machine, with, as Thomas said, a great autonomy, design, general good quality of the components. An Apple (machine) is not different at all from any other PC in terms of 'openness'.



    However, those using Mac OS X are a lot less consistent, even if developing Free Software doesn't mean rely only on free soft!



    I am sure that most of the Free Soft guys are not complaining about commercial soft : they just think that 2 ways are possible and can live together (probably like every other thing in life!)...
  • I do agree that some of the "free software developers" on Mac are solely on Mac because (they think) that makes them cool (ie. the "halo" effect). And you're totally correct with this, I must emphasise, if their reason for this is truly "a protest against Microsoft". But, I think you generalize too much.



    To be a consistent free software developer, according to you Jeremy, the developer must build his/her on computer using free/GPL hardware and using a free/GPL software? Your stance on free software orthodoxy sounds dangerously like Richard Stallman. And yeah, if you really want to be philosophically hard core free software guy a la RSM, you're right that Macs are out of the question.



    I don't buy your defintion of "closed environment". Take a look at Adium. I mean, that's a piece of software that is impossible to develop on Windows or Linux, because it depends heavily on the frameworks available on Mac OS X. In my opinion, it's the poster boy for all the right reasons to develop on Mac. Other example I'd like to point out is Delicious Library and Wil Shipley. I mean, a book cataloging software for Mac? How niche is that? (Which reminds me, does someone remember the cataloging software Microsoft demoed with Vista betas? What happened to that?)



    I believe the paradox you describe is only with these "Microsoft-protesters". If the reason to be a free software developer on Mac is that it's a cool and kick-ass enviroment, this paradox does not exist?
  • Jeremy, you know, many developers develop free software with commercial tools ...your whole post misses the point.
  • Thomas> I agree with all your points but this one: I actually don't believe Mac have such a good ratio: okay they're beautiful, but also expensive, heavy, hot (ie heat), and not so interoperable.



    Julien> I don't know anyone that uses any other OS on a Mac laptop than Mac OS. Sometimes, people (like me) have secondary OSs (I use Vista & Ubuntu as secondary OSs but my primary is Mac OS X). I agree with you: the advocates of Free Software who run Mac OS X are totally inconsistent.



    Kari> 100% in line with you



    Steve> Steve, you know, many of the software developers who develop free software with commercial tools really look ridiculous... Your whole comment misses the point.
  • Håkan
    This is such a strawman...



    There's no paradox. Hardware is never open, it's always sold by a commercial vendor.



    As someone else mentioned, most of us think that Apple makes the best hardware, so that's what we use. Simple as that.



    You can install whatever you want on the laptop. Either use OS X, and go wild with MacPorts and install all the unix free software you want, or go all the way and dual-boot with Linux, for example.
  • I've always thought this myself (says the commenter from his MacBook). Unfortunately the pangs of regret I get aren't enough to stop me from loving Mac OS X as a platform. Simple fact is, it's beautiful. I suspect it's beauty is largely derived from Cocoa, and the underlying technologies like Quartz Extreme, Core Graphics|Video|Data, etc.



    But, don't despair. There is GNUStep, which is an open source implementation of Cocoa (http://www.gnustep.org). It's a bit rough comparatively, but it's basically there. There are even some cool things being done with it like Etoile (http://www.etoile-project.org/etoile/blog/).



    So, while I do use a Mac, I'm hoping for a Free system as good or better than the Mac. The realization of Etoile and GNUStep would go a long ways toward that end. There's a ways to go, but it's an attainable goal.
  • Apple has contributed much to the Open Source software effort. They gave full time employment to several major Open Source authors who continue to maintain important projects aside from their Apple commitments. Apple programmers continue to contribute major chunks of code to top level Open Source projects like GCC, Perl, etc. Almost all of MacOS X is Open Source except for the Aqua GUI layer, and a few bits of lower level code for purposes of DRM.

    Apple is the largest Open Source developer in the world. Who are you going to go with instead, Microsoft?
  • andy
    I think you're making a big error confusing "open-source" with "free". Being "open-source friendly" doesn't mean that you can't try to sell a product.



    Apple products certainly aren't free, but the company is definitely open-source friendly. Consider:

    1) Linux compatibility

    2) The OpenDarwin project

    3) Apple is the single biggest commercial contributer to FreeBSD

    4) Many other things (actually there's a whole web site: http://www.opensource.apple.com/ )



    By the way, what exactly is so "closed" and "secretive" about Apple? You didn't really explain that point.
  • Nicolas
    Jeremy Faine> you mean to say people who write open source software for windows using Visual Studio look ridiculous? Of course, had you given a valid explanation for your thoughts maybe we would be enlightened...



    Writing software is one thing, the tools you choose to do so with are irrelevant, nothing about choosing a commercial tools makes you look ridiculous, especially when they are blatantly superior and rather affordable.



    Taking Ruby on Rails as an example, I'm sure that's a pretty laudable effort, and none of the main developers certainly "look ridiculous," even though they all use OS X, and TextMate... which is pretty understandable if you've ever used TextMate.



    Now, back to work...
  • Nicolas> You didn't get my point because I hadn't made myself clear enough. Many of the develops hacking open source code, BECAUSE they are against proprietary software, actually use a Mac - the Apple platform being an epitome of a closed platform.

    I believe these people are ridiculous.

    Hence the title. That's it as not all open source developers are stupidly against proprietary and commercial. I do believe there are excellent open source and proprietary bricks of software and pragmatic people (some of them hacking open source code on a Mac not because they hate Microsoft but because they love Macs) know what they want and for what reason.

    Some people take software and hardware brands religiously. I firmly believe these are stupid. Not the ones who choose the tools best suited to their needs independently of their brand.
  • Andy> Totally agree on open source different than free software. I'm making this shortcut for things to be clearer to my non-geek readership.



    What so closed and secretive about Apple? Well, can you use Dell hardware with Mac OS? How many Apple employees blogging do you know? I could go on like that forever.
  • disinfotainment> So if I get it right, Apple pays open source developers, who love Apple stuff in return - is that the deal?
  • Hakan> read my answer to Nicolas, same one for you



    Peter> fair enough
  • Openness is a relative term. Sure you can't run Mac-OS on a Dell, but you can run pretty much any OS on a Mac. That means to me that the Mac is in fact more open than the PC, though I'll admit that this is largely due to Apple's closed strategy.



    That is not to say, that Microsoft doesn't employ closed strategies as well, on e.g. mobiles, the xbox, or the future surface-platform. And while Silverlight is cross-platform, you could argue that the most comprehensive development for it can only happen on a PC, at least for the moment. Before you shoot me, see point 8 here.



    And as far as open-source developers go, I know very few that have a full-time job coding free apps (and I do include open source in those). Either they have a second job, or the business-model revolves around other related services that generate revenue. Either way, you have to ask yourself, how did they afford a mac in the first place? If they are students, that doesn't count.



    I also don't want to stereotype a specific group into a category, which is why I think this post is particularly getting negative comments. Macs are however, in my biased opinion, pretty great platforms to be comfortable on. You can choose the Mac OS, which, again in my opinion, an elegant working-environment, and you can virtualise or dual-boot into other platforms, not to mention hack the web. And you have top-notch hardware (mostly) to work with.



    Notwithstanding that Macs look cool and many geeks probably hope that it will score them chicks (oops I did generalise there...)
  • Hmmm I must say, this statement is completely false: "Apple is the epitome of a closed platform"



    Nevermind that the kernel and most of the cli tools are open source, along with webkit and a number of the frameworks they provide, free. Just forget all that.



    Why I Choose Apple Hardware: Size, Weight, Performance, Style



    Why I Choose OS X: Beautiful UI. Stable as rock. Unix-like behind the scenes. Solid command-line.



    Why I Like/Often Choose Open Source: Quality, Good, Easy, Free. (You don't have to be an open source hippie to like open source software)



    Why I Choose Open Source Programming Languages: Great, Free, Not-Bounded-To-A-Single-OS.



    Also...I don't have to hate Microsoft to use another operating system and programming languages. I simply feel I am more productive in OS X and Linux than I am in Windows.



    There isn't a 'free software on a mac developer paradox'. Plain and simple.
  • Mannkind, thanks for your input.



    My opinion on your different points:



    Apple hardware: okay for everything but weight



    OSX: I agree



    Open source: completely disagree, it really depends on which open source software you're talking about. Plus it's in most cases far from easy and hardly free (consider the total cost of ownership in enterprise environment deployments). I think you're too quick on striking generalizations.



    Open source programming languages: great, it depends on the language and what you want to do with it. Again, your stance seems to be a generalization to me.



    Apart from our petty disagreements (because I think Apple is everything but an opened company), I just discovered your blog and I love it! Just can't help finding nerdy / geeky attitude blogs to be the best :)
  • Jeremy,



    Open Source Software: Of course I am generalizing. We are discussing a vast library of software. It won't apply to every last bit OSS, but to the software that I use on a regular basis, I think it does. To name a few of the OSS I use that fall under at least 3 out of 4 of the reasons I use OSS: Pidgin, AdiumX, Firefox, Thunderbird, Handbrake, Transmission, Subversion, Mercurial, Apache, Python, Java, Perl, PHP, Linux, OpenOffice, Cyberduck, SSH, Audacity, GPG, Eclipse, VNC, VLC, MySQL, PostgreSQL, Vim... like I said, just a few. :)



    Programming Languages (open source and/or free): There are so many programming languages available, my reasons are generalized towards the programming languages that I use or have used. For example: C, C++, Python, Perl, PHP, Ruby, Java (just to name a few) run on at least Windows, OS X, and Linux. That covers Not-Bound-To-A-Single-OS and, well, Free (both in use, tools, etc). One can argue about 'great', fine.



    I think Kari (comment posted previously) is on the right track..., "I believe the paradox you describe is only with these 'Microsoft-protestors'". If someone hates Microsoft simply because they are closed source, using a Mac doesn't exactly make them look too smart.



    Glad you found/like the blog. It's not as active as I would like it to be, but it *is* pretty nerdy ('nerd pickup lines' is the most frequently used search term that bring in random visitors to my blog).



    Now I'm off to play Gears of War on my Xbox360. ;)
  • Jeremy,

    I don't know if you expressed your self clearly enough in your original posts. It seems that many people commenting here are missing your point ("Hip posers using Macs to fight the Man", if I got it right).



    Maybe you should do a follow-up?
  • Mannkind, Kari,



    You're both obviously right. The paradox only applies to anti-Microsoft folks.
  • Jeremy,

    Irony is not probably not the right word, hyprocrisy probably not either, but Mac seems to be more and more open source people's dev platform of choice.

    http://www.regdeveloper.co.uk/2007/10/01/mac_op...
blog comments powered by Disqus

Staypressed theme by Themocracy