No it doesn’t. There have beem tons of foss apps better than paid apps, and also the other way around. It doesn’t mean anything regarding the quality of the project.
As a user, the only thing you can be sure about, is that if the developer of a closed app gets hit by a bus, a stranger can’t just pick up the development. Other than that nothing is certain.
Sure, but it’s just a Lemmy client. If the Sync dev gets hit by a bus, I’ll just download a different client, plug my creds into that and be back to shitposting in a minute or two. All the important data is on the server.
You’d have to ask the developer, but it seems like they did not understand the license they released it under. They complained of people “plagiarizing” their source code after releasing it under the MIT license, which allows people to take the source and use it however they want.
Being open source doesn’t mean it’ll get stolen lol.
People can copy the code, but unless they add anything significant, everyone will keep using the most famous one. Plus there are several licenses which can add restrictions regarding ‘look, contribute, but don’t copy without permission’
Vulnerabilities would be discovered much quickly, and people will even contribute to it. He’ll still have the right to sell his app on the Play Store… or keep a premium type plan like he already has.
deleted by creator
No it doesn’t. There have beem tons of foss apps better than paid apps, and also the other way around. It doesn’t mean anything regarding the quality of the project.
As a user, the only thing you can be sure about, is that if the developer of a closed app gets hit by a bus, a stranger can’t just pick up the development. Other than that nothing is certain.
Sure, but it’s just a Lemmy client. If the Sync dev gets hit by a bus, I’ll just download a different client, plug my creds into that and be back to shitposting in a minute or two. All the important data is on the server.
Yea, fortunately it’s not a case of someone monopolising the market.
Not at all. Being open source allows the community of users and other developers to suggest improvements to the code base.
And you can still sell an app that is open source.
Or he doesn’t want his work stolen???
You can release your source code without making it freely available for people to use. Not every open source app is GPL licensed.
then why did the Paint.NET developer go from Open to closed?
You’d have to ask the developer, but it seems like they did not understand the license they released it under. They complained of people “plagiarizing” their source code after releasing it under the MIT license, which allows people to take the source and use it however they want.
Being open source doesn’t mean it’ll get stolen lol. People can copy the code, but unless they add anything significant, everyone will keep using the most famous one. Plus there are several licenses which can add restrictions regarding ‘look, contribute, but don’t copy without permission’ Vulnerabilities would be discovered much quickly, and people will even contribute to it. He’ll still have the right to sell his app on the Play Store… or keep a premium type plan like he already has.
I think for one person and one person only, the premium option is the way to go, but that’s just my opinion.