Open or Closed?
I hesitate to say anything, but some debates seem almost as counterproductive as the stench of patchouli. Charlie and Clancy have decided to take people to task for promoting open
source concepts while using proprietary software. It’s a bit like accusing people who wear mass-produced clothing of being in favor of global oppression. The issues are far more complex than that. I wasn’t on anyone’s list (I’m quite happy to be under the radar), but I wonder if Charlie and Clancy aren’t spending way too much time contemplating the box, rather than the cereal inside.
My guess is that the future of “open” anything is tied closely to understanding what “open” means. AKMA’s primary job (as far as I know) is in the religion business—not the software business. His openness there is refreshing; he’s already mentioned that the Disseminary will be switching to a different CMS—largely for philosophical reasons. However, for the people who have supported MT because it was the “right tool for the job” their change in business plan has not negated the functionality of their software. It has encouraged people to explore alternatives, yes, but it has not changed the fact that MT works well (now)— though it is questionable (in my opinion) how good the support for piddly users like us is going to be in the future. They have bigger plans; the future of MT for individuals is likely to be more promising in Typepad.
Promoting “open knowledge” or a “creative commons” isn’t the same thing as promoting “open source.” Methinks they doth protest too much. Personally, I’m far less concerned with the box (in this case) than the contents.
Oh— not that anyone cares—but I will probably be switching to WordPress because I want to play with it, not because of any great overarching desire to jump on the “open source” bandwagon. I’m more of an “open knowledge” kind of guy. Not everyone wants to be a software engineer (which seems a necessary condition given the state of most open source stuff). I finally came around to putting a CC license on this blog a while ago, but I’m not certain that using open source software is essential to having credibility as a believer in “open” concepts. It seems to be incredibly closed-minded to suggest otherwise.