[80 / 3 / ?]
Quoted By: >>51018979 >>51019011 >>51019239 >>51019442 >>51019524 >>51019532 >>51019952 >>51020034 >>51020093 >>51022402 >>51023139 >>51024242
I read a lot of posts on this board about the greatness of open source software, but there seems comparably little about the positives of closed source software, for instance:
1) More secure, its inherently safer due to the attacker not knowing exactly how things are implemented or what vunlerabilities are exposed. You wouldn't leave the blueprints to a bank vault in public where anyone can read them would you?
2) Better from a business standpoint because the company can control all aspects of the software, less chance of important data leaking out and cohesive design philosophy, all the development is centralized, not distributed or fragmentary, like many FOSS projects.
3) Does not hinder future development or reverse engineering with a restrictive license, while the GPL actively restricts the rights of the developer and is almost like a virus, propagating through software and rendering it unprofitable by the inclusion of GPL making the whole software forced to be GPL too.
1) More secure, its inherently safer due to the attacker not knowing exactly how things are implemented or what vunlerabilities are exposed. You wouldn't leave the blueprints to a bank vault in public where anyone can read them would you?
2) Better from a business standpoint because the company can control all aspects of the software, less chance of important data leaking out and cohesive design philosophy, all the development is centralized, not distributed or fragmentary, like many FOSS projects.
3) Does not hinder future development or reverse engineering with a restrictive license, while the GPL actively restricts the rights of the developer and is almost like a virus, propagating through software and rendering it unprofitable by the inclusion of GPL making the whole software forced to be GPL too.
