Free Not Free
June 21, 2009
Techradar’s “Why Free Web Services Aren’t Really Free” surprised me. I have been chugging along with the idea that when I navigated to Google’s search page, ran a query, and reviewed results I was using a free service. I have a free Yahoo email account, and I assumed that because I don’t pay Yahoo money, that email service was free. I learned that if I navigate to a freeware site and download a free application, that download service is not providing me with a free service.
I just learned that these services are not free. I needed to shift my thinking because I am not paying money, providing a PayPal cash transfer, or spitting out my credit card number.
Techradar’s point is that “free” does not mean that usage is without a cost. I was thinking about my Econ class in my freshman year at university. The use of certain words separates an econ major from the lowly math or science wonk. Econ revels in notions of “cost” and “value”.
Techradar asserted:
But from a free software perspective, we’re fighting a dangerous battle. Trading one closed-source app for another gets us nowhere, even if the new app happens to come from Google. Yes, the company does appear to have a bottomless source of storage and bandwidth, but would you feel happy recommending Google Docs to your friends if it were run by Microsoft? It’d be just as free and just as featureful – but somehow people have been fooled into thinking that Google can be as proprietary as it wants and we ought not to care. Tim O’Reilly’s classic speech, “The Open Source Paradigm Shift”, makes it clear that the commoditization of operating systems is imminent, with the next war being fought in the web app space. In 10 years’ time your desktop computer will almost certainly run nearly all your programs over the internet, with your OS being a relatively thin shell that fires up a web browser and points you towards the net. If, in that time, all we’ve done is trade offline closed-source apps for online closed-source apps, then everything we’re fighting for will be worthless. I don’t think anyone wants to see that happen.
Ah, I get it. “Lock in”, “rip and replace cost”, and “value of service”.
And why is lock in bad? It seems to be working in a number of business sectors. If I want to fix my Honda, I have to buy my part from Honda because it will in my experience fit, be less of a hassle if it fails, and can be installed by a Honda technician. The benefit of lock in may be utility or a greater good or a perceived value.
Should software and services be different? Customize an open source system using a third party and you have lock in. Tough to get away from this “value” notion and some other economic forces. Maybe “free” is bad for me because I want to pay so I have one throat to choke or at least a number to call when there is a problem.
Stephen Arnold, June 21, 2009
Comments
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
