I hear you on the “open source zealots”. If you read this post as I intended (and other things I’ve written in the past), then you know that I am very much *not* an open-source zealot, nor would I ever say that OS software is free. It’s not free. As you say, the client pays either way. It’s part of the job of a good nonprofit technology consultant to help orgs understand this very clearly.

I understand that you enjoy hosting and modifying software for your clients, but a good programmer can write excellent code for a platform they didn’t write as long as they are well-versed in it. I am all for small-shop developers supporting open-source and proprietary CMS/CRM software when possible, and I believe the Coke/Pepsi argument about open source vs. proprietary is ultimately moving toward open vs. closed APIs. I think the collaboration of many minds working on code can be extremely powerful. I love the innovations and energy that come from community development and open APIs.

As for this statement:

Additionally, I find that some webpeople who rely on Drupal or Joomla or other open source platforms don’t really know what they’re doing. If a client has a specific feature wish, their webperson typically says “No, it doesn’t work like that” either because they’re not a programmer, or they’re afraid of leaving the pack. Any custom code would get overwritten by a future update.

Wow, I’m sorry those are the kinds of developers you’ve encountered. The Drupal and Joomla (and Salesforce and Convio) developers I work with are excellent at what they do and know when something can be customized and when it can’t. Custom code getting overwritten by a future update? That doesn’t have to happen at all, unless you have absolutely no idea how to do things right. I do have clients to whom this has happened when their site was built by a less-than-stellar (usually startup, inexperienced) shop, and it’s a mess to fix. I wish they’d gone to the right development shop in the first place. But that’s always a risk when choosing a vendor, especially if you have limited financial resources and limited staff capacity to properly research your vendors.

As a website software programmer, I have lost some clients because their associates believe they’re getting ripped off by me because I use my own proprietary software instead of an open source platform. These “open-source zealots” are typically people who want their software for free, and worry about the “hit by a bus” scenario, or inevitable website move in the future, when they decide to redo the website.

It is true, I wouldn’t allow my code to run on someone else’s server (I host all my sites), I am however quite attentive to my client’s needs (the capitalist way) and can usually give them exactly what they want pretty quickly. And the code is usually written specifically for their needs in the first place.

Additionally, I find that some webpeople who rely on Drupal or Joomla or other open source platforms don’t really know what they’re doing. If a client has a specific feature wish, their webperson typically says “No, it doesn’t work like that” either because they’re not a programmer, or they’re afraid of leaving the pack. Any custom code would get overwritten by a future update.

Aside from all that, in the end the client pays either way, either by licensing code and hosting it with the author, or paying an hourly or base fee to a webperson to install open source on a server.

I do use open source software as well, including many code and template libraries, but I prefer to use software I’ve written in most cases. I know every line, and can change the software quickly and efficiently, with a full understanding of the ramifications. But that’s just me.

So, that’s the third viewpoint.

See you ’round town.

How might an open source model best thrive? Who makes money writing open source software? The business models that come to mind (and there was recently a great blog post about this somewhere by someone I like, and I need to remember where it is and dig it up) are Red Hat Linux. Also my friend Ryan, who runs PICnet software, and Nonprofit Soap Box, which is a SaaS, hosted, customizable Joomla platform. Configuration, customization and services–those are some ways that developers can make money by further developing open-source code. But the code is still available for iterative development by someone else, and that’s what I like.

And good god, the last thing I want is for people to equate open-source with “free.” Oh man, SO not the case! Different kinds of costs, but never, ever free.

Apple gets targeted because in order to use their nice software, you must buy their pricey hardware. Turn an eye towards companies like Google, which have long ago cast aside their “dont be evil” mantra, and been giving away “free” software and services in return for signing away your privacy.