If communism is a flawed theory of incentives, why does open-source software work well, but Windows doesn't?

Question

Open-source software, for those who still use Windows, is free, non-proprietary software that is open for all to use and improve. How could a public, open-source good be so good if critiques of communism are correct?

The Soviet Union was really existing communism, not true communism (read your Marx, people!). The Soviet Union was like Microsoft, a monopoly posing as a good guy. By the way, Microsoft's monopolisitic practices are why you pay so much for such a poor quality.

Businesses who buy IBM servers and supercomputers get along fine with their open-source software. check your facts!

Answer 1

First off, youre correct. This is a communistic approach in action. The goal for each person is to help themself while simultaneously helping everyone else.

Side points that must be made to dispute the ignorance surrounding communism and the answers already given:

1. Communism doesnt work because it relies on perfect people. No pure system works, they all rely on perfect people. Pure capitalism led to the depression in America, pure monarchy has led to countless revolts, the feudal system was a failure in the end, democracy always degenerates into fighting or dictatorship, etc. All pure systems rely on the many being put before the one, but everyone has to do this and that is never going to be possible under one system.

2. Communism doesnt work based on history. Communism has NEVER been tried. The Quakers are pseudo-communistic, much closer than any country has ever been, look how successful theyve been. Note that it is small societies that can more easily put the many above the few--small societies always work better on purer systems.

3. Windows is not better than open source. It is just used more. The argument that popularity = better is assinine. That same logic can be applied to food to show its ignorance. By that logic, fast food is the best food available in America since it is eaten the most.

4. Windows is better? Find one major company that runs their main servers on Windows--good luck... Most companies run Unix, Linux, or even Mac servers for a reason. Windows is used on user systems because people are familiar with it and its difficult to purchase a computer without it. Having monopolistic control of an industry does not make a superior product. Computer people, the ones who understand the systems (RajinCajin is obviously not one of these informed people) are as a group switching away from Windows these days.

5. Open source is a perfect example of communism despite what people are saying. Communism is not to be based on forcing people into jobs. It is done that way due to misapplication. Where you can do the most good is the determining factor, that evaluation should include what you want to do. Just because it has been misapplied in the past does not mean the system is wrong.

Answer 2

Actually there are companies that have had access to the source code for Microsoft Windows. Microsoft Windows doesn't fall under the term Free Open Source Software, but has been "open" to some companies, government agencies, and educational institutes. Getting access to the source isn't necessarily easy, but it can be done.

Answer 3

I think you are confused about what communism means. If all have a chance to use and improve the software, it is an example of a free-market concept, where many individuals have access to its operation and the freedom to improve on its function.

In communism, products are developed by very few individuals, presented to top officals and, then whoever is in charge decides which one is to be distributed to the masses. The people have no choice, no chance to invent or develop. Only recieve and make do with whatever is doled out to them.

Answer 4

after 16 years of public use, linux still hasnt become mainstream, as opposed to the 2-300$ windows which is around the same age. but youre comparing two completely different things. windows is for the general user who doesnt care about programming and scientific use. linux is more for the computer researcher, programmer, enthusiast, etc. a guy who just wants to check his email, or do simple things does not typically resort to linux.

communism has nothing to do with open source or freeware, because under communism the *public money* is used to pay for everything, meaning you pay for it anyway. nothing is "free" under communism.

Answer 5

I think I get what you're saying, the problem is that pure communism is a theory that cannot exist in real life, because people, especially at the top, are looking to grease their own wheels. This will never change.

Answer 6

Open source operating systems are not as user friendly (nor would they be as bug free if they were the standard) and cannot perform to the levels business requires for daily functioning - hence companies like Microsoft, and why they stay in business.

Business cannot afford open source software from an operational standpoint.

If open source software were used in significant numbers - it would have far more problems, bugs, glitches and security problems than Microsoft - with no central problem solving or trouble shooting.

Answer 7

It's hard to say. It's not a real correlation though.

And windows does work pretty well despite what open source snobs think.

I like that open source is out there even though I still mostly use windows.

Answer 8

Yea, we see how many computers use open source Operating systems, compared to windows.

They must run on, wow, atleast 5% of the market.

Go give your mom a red hat cd and watch her try and get her computer running.............lol

Answer 9

You might want to go re-read Marx yourself. About half way through the Manifesto he slips up and reveals the whole plan is just a clever way to gain control over the population with their popular consent.

Answer 10

Nice existentialist theory. If free software works then so does Communism.

What a bunch of garbage.