The Trap of Permanent Mediocrity: Difference between revisions

From Open Source Ecology
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 5: Line 5:
A person will normally choose the 'better' product for their immediate need.
A person will normally choose the 'better' product for their immediate need.


This is natural, but it has a long-term negative effect. The free product
This is natural, but it has a long-term negative effect. The free product is neglected, never improves. The downside is expensive proprietary sofware that everyone in the future must rely on.
 
So: either use and support open source, and the price goes down for everyone in the future. There are many examples where freeware
 
 
 
To go further - commission the development of open source software. See article [https://timlwhite.medium.com/comwhy-you-should-pay-for-open-source-2e268b57e762]

Revision as of 22:05, 24 August 2022

There is a cultural phenomenon of Permanent Mediocrity Fallacy, driven by short term human thinking - which is responsible for much of open source software remaining mediocre for ever, and not dominating the space as has been demonstrated by products such as Linux, Wordpress, Blender, and others - which have become the respected industry standards with the highest market share in their respective areas.

In the Fallacy, a user has a choice between an open source or a free, proprietary product. This is not considering a paid proprietary product, which already has a gate to it in terms of price.

A person will normally choose the 'better' product for their immediate need.

This is natural, but it has a long-term negative effect. The free product is neglected, never improves. The downside is expensive proprietary sofware that everyone in the future must rely on.

So: either use and support open source, and the price goes down for everyone in the future. There are many examples where freeware


To go further - commission the development of open source software. See article [1]