I just think this whole thread is ridiculous. Why should you, Google, or any other team doing open source development, who see a need, hesitate to fill it, in case someone else might also want to come along and do it? Everyone should just be doing their best open source work, on whatever they feel like adds value to the community.
-- Eric On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 2:32 PM, Stoyan Damov <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 7:05 PM, Shane Isbell <[email protected]> wrote: >> Al has a valid point. If Google creates products that compete with >> open-source ones, it harms the open-source ones. One big example I can think >> of was Microsoft killing NDoc, a very popular doc generation tool, when they >> released Sandcastle. > > Shane, please, don't mention Microsoft in the context of open-source :) > The only thing Microsoft are great wrt open source is to take a ready > project, duplicate it, gather user base and abandon it. > I think this process (embrace, extend and extinguish)[1] is > copyrighted by Microsoft. > > [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend_and_extinguish > > So far, I haven't seen anything like that from Google, but if they do > start competing with open-source projects they might end up being the > only devs for their platform. > >> >> It is a matter of the health of the open-source community. Google of course >> has no obligation to not compete, as some have already pointed out. But if >> they are too aggressive in competing, it will de-motivate open-source >> project members. Many get started on an open-source project and continue >> development because it satisfies an itch. If Google delivers a similar (or >> better) product, the itch is gone. >> >> So Google has the option of competing with the open-source projects or >> contributing to those projects and helping them grow. I'll be interested to >> see how this plays out over the next 12 months. >> >> Shane >> >> On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 8:44 AM, Andreas Kostyrka <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>> Symbian is greener pasture? LOL. >>> Actually they are trying to reform themselves, philosophically probably as >>> a response to Android, but that will take some time. >>> >>> Andreas >>> >>> JP <[email protected]> hat geschrieben: >>> >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> >On Apr 9, 7:52 am, mike quinn <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >> You say it is unlikely that an independent developer will invest >>> >> time/money/resource to make their application "look" professional and >>> >> provide unique selling points, hell mend them then. >>> >No I am saying they will pack for greener grass. iPhone, Symbian, you >>> >name it. >>> > >>> >> >>> >> Just because someone got there first doesn't mean that any other >>> >> developer >>> >> (Google included) should not be able to produce the same application >>> >> that a) >>> >> Looks better and/or b)provides additional killer features. >>> >Sure, in an ideal world, there is always a better app around the >>> >corner. This is a paper tiger however and you prove the point that the >>> >paper tiger screams the loudest. Reality check! It takes substantial >>> >effort to put something compelling together and - speaking for myself >>> >here - I do not feel inspired to put the effort forward as long as >>> >there's the Google brand looming. This is how MS Explorer kill >>> >Netscape. >>> >All things considered, I rather find something else to do with my >>> >time. >>> > >>> > >>> -- >>> Sent from my Android phone with K-9. Please excuse my brevity. >>> >> >> >> > >> > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Discuss" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-discuss?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
