update 2012 01 18 12:45 GMT +1: I have realized only now, reading the comments, that there is one more reason after Francesco’s outburst that isn’t immediately clear but makes certain replies a bit less valid. Unlike what happens with lots of successful FOSS products, Francesco’s software is something that is absolutely useless outside Italy, even if it were localized, so his market is much smaller than that for something like Linux, apache, etc… simply because he implements specific procedures that only exist, in that format, inside italian schools, because they must be compliant with italian laws etc…
A couple of months ago I published, in the Italian version of this website, a complaint about sissiWeb, an italian proprietary software for school administration. The gist of that complaint was that:
- the official sissiWeb brochure explicitly says that its Web interface will work everywhere…
- but the official sissiWeb documentation explains that yes, Firefox won’t work, unless you install an extension… which is the one that runs Internet Explorer inside Firefox, something that isn’t written in the sissiWeb manual
this would be news in and by itself (and in fact, I wrote a whole article about it), but the purpose of this page is something else. When Francesco, the developer of schoolAdmin another management software for Italian schools, wrote back to me to explain that his product is truly cross-platform, he also explained why he feels he can’t afford to make schoolAdmin Free/Open Source Software. With his permission, here is what he wrote, followed by a few questions from me to the whole FOSS community:
My software company is very small, but I have almost 30 years of programming experience (I’m 41 years old, and started coding when I was 13). I make a living with programming and ICT consulting. However, since 2010, consulting opportunities have hugely diminished because of the crisis, so I decided to produce software for a bigger market than the one I had worked in until that year. It took me one year to write schoolAdmin, with help from two teacher friends, finding the time between paid work and family “duties” (I have a 3 years old daughter), and I believe I have realized a product that is quite different from those you can find online. The feature I strive the most to offer is usability which (in my personal opinion) is exactly what is missing from competing products.
I adore Free/Open Source Software (Marco: schoolAdmin is a *AMP/Java application). However, I also believe that [in order to develop it] you must either have a big organization that supports the development of that software, or be yourself a big company that can afford to make money also in other ways.
The reason why I asked Francesco permission to publish his outburst is to stimulate the whole FOSS community to share thoughts and experiences on this topic, to find out how general the problem he signals is in 2012. Personally, I still remember hearing, during a Linux Day in Rome almost ten years ago, somebody commenting a talk about the FOSS used in, and developed by, the Bank of Italy asking to himself: “so, in order to develop FOSS you must belong to a big organization?”
What do you think? Do you agree with Francesco? What is your experience in similar cases? How general is Francesco’s conclusion? Besides, do you too, think that current FOSS products for schol management lack usability?
Thanks in advance to all who will share their thoughts in the comments!
Pingback: Da chi è sostenibile l’Open Source? | Stop
In my experience, also small and very small companies can thrive with FOSS. Does anybody have strong evidence of the contrary?
Ciao Paolo.
Personally, I have no definite opinion about this. I published Francesco’s letter just to try to gather more information. For example, it may be interesting to discover if/how much this depends on the sector in which one works, e.g. school (as Francesco) vs GIS (as you do with Faunalia), or how much it is different from country to country. Let’s hope many reader answer!
He does not give one reason why he thinks that you need to be a big company or have a big organization that supports the development. Can he explain what it is that he perceives the problem to be?
Fred,
Wether he’s wrong or right is another issue but… isn’t why he thinks so obvious from the rest of the quote? He thinks he has no other ways and/or enough time to make enough money to pay the bills, or to repay the development investment, if he won’t be able to charge for any installation of the software, or if others will be able to service and customize it without paying royalties to him.
There is more than one way to skin cat.
Most developers think FOSS or Closed. Some of the more sucessful open source projects are both.
New features released closed. Once development costs have been recovered source code released. This is a double advatnage. One coder gets paid. Two the maintaince of older parts of the program are shared. Some cases the coder even sets a return price for each part to be open sourced.
Developers doing this don’t have to be large companies. At times large companies will come fund developers like this. Since they know by doing so the source code will be released. So its not worth developing a competting product.
if you make money from the software you need to be a big company because the investment is very heavy. but if you use open source as an enabler in a business then you dont need to be a big company. you make money from business that open source makes possible. you collaborate with other users of the software to make your business competitive. one example is accounting software. in my case open source cyber cafe management software and linux servers. you dont make money from writing the software but from the use of the software.
in francesco’s case he should make it open source. it costs nothing. the more people using and contributing the better. how is he going to make others use it if he does not have marketing? how is he going to maintain it?
if his software is useful to people they will use it.
Pingback: Who can afford Open Source? | Linux | Syngu
Update from Francesco (I’m translating an excerpt of his last reply to the italian version of this page:
In developing my software, I evaluated the different business options provided by FOSS andI found that few of those are applicable to my specific case. Those for me not applicable include:
sale of a complete system (hardware and more software free pay) because mine is an online program
dual licensing, free and a commercial, but because a school would have no interest in software (albeit free) that has reduced functionality.
And I could do other examples.
The possibilities on which I focused were product customization and payment of a subscription which includes all software updates. And, looking at the question from this perspective, one might almost say that my product is free (but definitely do not want to provide material of philosophical speculation on this concept).
This said, the main focus of my outburst was about the fact, which surely I didn’t highlight well, which is that the Italian Ministry of Education supports adoption of computer-assisted teaching, but does not seem to provide the means for evaluation (by schools) or diffusion (for the benefit of the software houses but also of the same schools ) of these instruments.
If such tools were available… schools may have a broader view of the offer (being able to evaluate both the features that the prices of the proposed solutions), the software companies would be driven (by increased competition) to make products more user-friendly and more responsive to current regulations and small businesses are to compete on equal terms with larger ones. Then the market would decide what succeeds and what fail.
Open source or free software for small businesses is certainly a convenient option, but if it remains the only choice, adopting it can often be slow and tiring if you do not have a solid base (=income stream from other activities) on which to rely (especially in these times).
Pingback: Links 18/1/2012: Btrfs In Linux 3.3, Oxygen-gtk3 1.0, Woz Says Android Better Than hypePhone | Techrights
I too love FOSS, but I see no reason why someone like Francesco shouldn’t be able to make a living.
FOSS has many obstacles. An example of this is the Compiz Fusion project (see here: http://smspillaz.wordpress.com/2011/12/25/apology-2/). Under-resourced, under-funded, yet one of the projects that really put desktop Linux on the map (although not far enough onto the map to compete with OEMs bundling Windows with 99% of all new OEM hardware – something that violates several anti-trust/anti-competition laws in numerous countries).
As for the ‘cross-platform’ aspect of this story: the masses are not ‘cross-platform’. A cold hard cruel reality is that Microsoft dominates the desktop space (by breaking the law and forcing OEMs to bundle its Windows OS to maintain a desktop OS monopoly). As a developer myself, I don’t exactly “target” the Windows platform per se, but it’s a very important consideration when designing any piece of software for anyone hoping to reach the largest possible demographic – Windows users. And while ‘cross-platform’ is a very noble goal (and something that really should be a primary goal), it’s not really going to impact you that much if your product doesn’t run on Linux.
Having said the above, things have started to change in the last 3 or so years. The most significant of these changes is (IMHO) the uptake of Mac OS and mobile devices. Where desktop was once the king for information consumption, there is a current trend which shows consumers moving to mobile devices (tablets, phones etc). While Windows is definitely losing market share, Microsoft are combating this using their patent portfolio (litigation), UEFI, and marketing muscle to try and get back into the race (notice how they have moved Windows to ARM?!). Also note that Microsoft are now adopting (and butchering, I might add) open standards in their latest incarnation of Windows (aka ‘Windows 8′).
Another factor worth mentioning: many BRIC countries are now actively taking up the use of Linux (on the desktop) in education and government!
So, the argument could be made that the forward thinking developer really should make “cross-platform” the highest priority in order to future-proof his/her products and projects.
Still, I have no objection to Indy developers churning out bespoke software and making a living from it. Ultimately, it’s the market (and Microsoft’s lawyers, and SOPA) who will decide the success or failure of projects. Simple case of supply and demand. The developer has the freedom to choose which path he/she takes
.
Scott,
thanks a lot for the informative reply, but I have to disagree (in this context/case at least) with one specific point you make:
the masses are not ‘cross-platform’.
When one freely chooses to develop software with a Web only interface, that software must be really cross platform, at least with the most recent versions of all the main browsers. For the simple reason that even people who only use Microsoft on their own computers may very often want or need to access it from somebody else’s computer or smartphone or internet kiosk. Even if you don’t explicitly “sell” it as software that is usable from everywhere.
This whole thread started exactly because there is a company in Italy that sells school administration software saying explicitly that it will work everywhere, but in fact only works with Internet Explorer.
I think Francesco’s point has been missed here.
Many open-source developers have a regular income for putting food on the table. If you are not one of those developers you need to make immediate cash back on whatever you are producing. Creating open-source software gives potential customers the opportunity to obtain your hard work and pay somebody else to maintain it without you earning a cent.
I personally have been looking for employment in the UK for 18 months now with 20 years programming experience under my belt. In the time I have not had work I have created two software applications which I published open-source. I had donation buttons and paid-for support options on my homepage. One of the applications received update requests from my servers for 300+ users in Europe, 1100+ in Asia and a non-too-measly 1800+ in South America. So far the donations have amount to USD$200 and 3 paid for support which just about covered the cost of a new keyboard and monitor.
Open source is great if you can actually make money from it, or as Francesco has pointed out, you have a big enough wallet to not worry about those who don’t pay.
Very well said, Adam, thanks.
Hm, while I can understand him, I do not share the same opinion. Since I do not earn my money in the OSS environment all what follows are simply observations / ideas.
He earned money from programming and (mainly ?) consulting. Fine, many peoples do so. He can not earn money anymore from consulting. Well, I guess that is what has happened to many other freelancing folks as well.
I think it boils down to this: You can make money with OSS as well if your business modell is good enough.
Other companies do as well. Just to name archivista here (http://www.archivista.ch/en/). They provide open-source DMS / ERP solutions plus an open-source virtualisation solution. From what I know they make money by selling hardware and providing service.
I do not know anything about schoolAdmin but the public field (educational, healthcare and so one) will never be the environment where you are able to make a lot of money. I neither see the point of making schoolAdmin OSS or not in regard of earning money. Francesco could do a licensing modell which lets non-profit agencies use his software while schools have to pay (something like that). All this plus providing help in setting up local systems against cash could be enough to earn money.
If software development of a certain program is not profitable, then…well…do what everyone else is doing:
Try to get a different job !
People do not seem to understand that freedom of source code does not mean freedom of payment.
Just my two cents,
Holger
Pingback: Who can afford Open Source? | Stop | Open Hacking
I don’t think that proprietary software is necessarily evil. Evil is when you use DRM. Evil is when you take bugs into account “because users will find them”. Evil is making anti-competitive agreements. Evil is spying on your users. Evil is over 75% margins (25% is cost). Evil is selling is more important than making a good product. Evil is forcing people to pay for your software even if they don’t want to use it. Evil is putting your users in peril, because taking responsibility is expensive. Some of these “evils” could be applied to FOSS with equal ease. We’re used to divide the world into good (FOSS) and bad (proprietary), but that is oversimplification. There may be good reasons to make your product proprietary, e.g. if you can’t put extra value into it by doing consultancy (also beyond technical consultancy, e.g. organizational), documentation or education. I don’t support the premise that you have to be LARGE organization to do it. Facebook and Google started small as well – and they did it.
Pingback: Who can afford Open Source? | Stop | churchtechfeeds.com
The thing is small companies usually struggle with cash flow, and producing something for free in hope that they will make money out of consultancy is a big gamble, and it’s something that they can’t afford to do in the first place.
Fadi,
yes, I believe that this may be exactly what Francesco was trying to say. My own interest in this (I’m not a software developer, but more of a reporter/observer) is to try to figure out how much this one, or any other conclusion we may reach, is general. Thanks
Pingback: With leaders like these, Free Software will never win | Stop