What Motivates Software Developers? 40
TekZen asks: "LWN posted a reference to an ABC News article that claims 'Other than Linux, all the other open-source projects move along at a rate best described as glacial.' The reason? 'This probably is a function of how motivation and lack of fear work among open-source developers.' Are you motivated by fear to develop at work? What motivates you as an Open Source software developer?"
Simple. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Simple. (Score:4, Insightful)
The quote, "[o]ther than Linux, all the other open-source projects move along at a rate best described as glacial," is both false and rather stupid, but that's a separate issue. Open source projects, like all projects, move at a variety of rates, some fast, some slow. I'm a little surprised that Dvorak said that, since he's usually not quite that clueless, but then I'm also not quite sure how his article ties into the question of the motivations of developers.
[*] "Money, sex, power and elephants," is the curious list proposed by Barrayaran ImpSec Chief Simon Illyan.
Re:Simple. (Score:2)
Personally.. (Score:2)
Mmm. *Ruby fuzzies*
what major projects move slowly? (Score:3, Informative)
Compare it to other projects in the same vein. Independent ones, there's not many developers, it moves slowly. Major ones, or ones with funding, there's motivation to work on it besides "Hey, I have a few minutes and wouldn't it be cool if...".
Re:what major projects move slowly? (Score:3, Insightful)
But what I think the article means is that if you get away from large projects, many really do move rather slowly. Take a look at the 2 billion things on SourceForge. They often move incredibly slow or are abandoned. Also small projects often reach their goals and really don't NEED updates very often.
Re:what major projects move slowly? (Score:2)
The article specifically mentioned Open Source. All of these are open source.
Fear is a good motivator (Score:3, Insightful)
So yes, open-source projects aren't motivated to do it, they're motivated to do it right.
Re:Fear is a good motivator (Score:1)
I just don't know how many projects I refused to work on simply because they seemed boring. If I don't end up learning anything when coding, it's a waste of time.
On the other hand, I just like the fact that my contributions are appreciated.
right. (Score:1)
Maybe the author defines "Linux" as "all the stuff that comes on the 9-disc super Red Hat distribution".
In which case, I probably agree.
Fear is a horrible motivator (Score:3, Insightful)
I would say that this is actually a credit to the quality of Free Software. Most open source projects won't commit quick hacks, they will wait for someone to do a proper job of it (especially the BSD's). An angry boss breathing down your neck is a very good reason to do a quick hack of the job
John Dvorak -- please retire (Score:1)
Worst slashdot article, ever.
Sensationalist headline. (Score:3, Interesting)
But the article was actually pretty good.
Summary:
1. The open source world is pretty confusing and seems complicated to the not-previously-exposed.
2. More and more people are growing up in this culture and that's trouble for Microsoft.
3. Wouldn't it be great if all that legacy software (that gets sold as part of the assets when a company goes under, and then disappears from view forever) was released as open source. It's not doing anyone any good where it is.
The last point is a great one. The problem is that all that code is usually encumbered by licensing agreements with companies that are also defunct, and the successors are sometimes hard to find and/or don't know how to renegotiate a contract when they don't even recognize the products and licenses being discussed. That, and of course, that there's no monetary incentive to do so, certainly not one that outweighs the risk of getting sued a la SCO by the fifth-generation successor to the ownership of the assets of XYZ corp (d.1990, RIP)..
and FreeBSD and KDE and GNOME and Mozilla and (Score:3, Insightful)
There are thousands, perhaps millions of open source projects (over 100,000 on sourceforge alone). Some move, some don't. Linux isn't the only fast mover, in fact I'd have to say that KDE moves faster. Course KDE has about ten times as much code, in a lot more different areas, and that leaves more room. Remember the Mythical man-month applies, but when there is more modular code there is more room for more people.
Check the linux game of the month project. Just a couple months to take a game from almost nothing to great. Course the scope is much smaller than linux. Just one example of what motivates developers, and a good one because they are not a single project like KDE or the linux kernel.
When you define success you can eliminate all projects except linux if you want. However there are plenty of projects other than linux that are successful if you would give a definition that isn't so narrow.
Fear and recognition (Score:4, Interesting)
Its just kinda yucky to put effort into software which will make another man rich. Its like youre told to sculpt the best sculpture you can, which will be snatched by someone else, youll get paid $5 and he'll put his name on it. Even if you couldnt personally sell the sculpture at $5, its still a bad deal.
And then, there are the constraints which REALLY and I mean REALLY demotivate you. Say you absolutely love developing in ANSI C99, using lots of pointers, using the Intel compiler, QT, and making the code portable across BSD, Linux, Win32 and Solaris. Youre put on a VisualC.NET platform, where you have to use C++, not allowed to touch many libraries you'll depend on, not allowed the Intel C compiler, not allowed to port to Linux etc. Say you think the code should be distributed across many small shared libraries to make it neat, and youre told to pack it all in 2 DLLs. It just makes you want to stop working on it. You just push yourself from that point onwards to get the paycheck.
If someone asked Da Vinci to put a smile on Mona Lisa, he'd probably spend only a few hours on it, PREFER not to have his name signed on it, and he'll paint another personal copy with passion, just for the satisfaction.
Just put 12 developers together, make a list of their IDEAL development environment, OS, language, tools, algorithm etc, and you'd know how hard it is for the employers to instill motivation into the work. Many people have preferences on 'just because' rather than reason, for example I just hate Java and want to use C, perl, OpenBSD, Postgresql, QT everywhere.
Just because.
Yeah but, (Score:2)
Re:Fear and recognition (Score:3, Interesting)
I ask only for clarification, because I haven't coded any gui apps for linux. Windows (api, mfc, vb, foxpro) and generic (java/swing, wxwidgets) only.
In fact, I thought that was one of the big 'draws' of gtk, was that being written in C, it could export to everything. QT, being written in C++, was much harder to make work in other languages.
Re:Fear and recognition (Score:2)
Re:Fear and recognition (Score:2)
On the topic of what motivates me, I work for a company that's gotten a lot of venture capital, has a lot of potential, and is beginning to show some signs of doing well. What motivates me is the hope of producing enough value to (a) repay the investors and let them show some happy profit, (b) keep my fellow group of
Re:Fear and recognition (Score:1)
Every so often, I used to run a little test: I compiled "hello, world" in C and C++. The last time I did this -- with gcc on Slackware, maybe a year ago -- was the *first* time the binaries were the same size. Usually the C++ binaries are two to two-and-a-half times the size of the C binaries. That is with *no* C++ features and the identical source code file renamed with a ".cc" suffix.
C++ has oth
Re:Fear and recognition (Score:2)
I've only seen C++ working really well in QT. I can work with it. Beside GUI applications, I'd much rather be programming in pure C just because I understand EVERYTHING about the language, all its keywords are second nature to me, and I cant look at a piece of C code and go 'huh'. I'll just read and understand it.
C++ on the other hand is too big for a language. I honestly
Re:Fear and recognition (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm going to guess here that you're probably very inexperienced, in fact have never worked as a developer. Real developers don't give a monkey's about things like that. Languages and compilers to us are tools that are used to solve problems. A mechanic doesn't develop an emotional attachement to his hammer and then try to use it to bang in screws!
put on a VisualC.NET platform, where you have to use C++,
No-one
Re:Fear and recognition (Score:2)
The fact that my Linux Device Drivers book is still unopened on the shelf notwithstanding, no I wouldn't.
Why not? Well if I'm writing a device driver outside work it's for something *I* need. I can customize it to what I want. But if I'm developing for someone else, there's no way I would go 6 months without feedback. Even if I have a spec carved in g
Lack of a girlfriend. (Score:3, Funny)
Nothing motivates me (Score:1)
Games are mainly what I like to program. So playing my creation takes up a good portion of time as well. It's usually more fun
Accomplishment (Score:1)
I am motivated by the desire to accomplish something (impressive). Fear has never been a motivating factor for me to get something done (tough I have been motivated by fear to leave a situation).
The responses to this thread begs the question "Are the software developers on Slashdot typical of the industry?"
-Jackson
<shameless plug> Core Enterprise PHP [sourceforge.net]</shameless plug>
It's a silly statement (Score:2)
The truth is that you should immediatly discount about 95% of the open source projects that are anno
Chaos and Unification (Score:3, Insightful)
A note about one point this Dvorak character makes: he seems to think that one day there will be unification among competing open source projects. He states that from an outsider's perspective, it all seems confusing. Well isn't that always the case? If you know which are the most popular, then don't you pick one of those? ie, go to the computer section at Barnes & Noble and buy one of the ones in the box. I doubt there are many non-drivers waiting till there is only one car to buy.
I also have to say that there will not be unification of competing projects in general - but quite the opposite. Projects will be forked and specialized or created anew because they can be; what unification that may happen may be in the form of common component architectures or other standards like common file, DB formats that make such specialization possible. However, to an outsider, it will still look the same even if all the projects are perfectly interchageable and interoperable, which is not unlike the linux situation. Where would project unification motivation come from? I just don't see it (generally) when these projects are for insiders, not for outsiders.
Think there are too many competing {standards|projects|languages|ideas} today? Consider retirement.
Slightly off topic (Score:2)
Along the same lines... (Score:1)
I've recently managed to move my company (of one... okay, I'm not huge, but it's significant to me) to mostly open source software. I've used Codeweavers to maintain the last couple of Win32 dependencies that I have. In this mind-expandingly healthy process, I've wondered only one thing...
Let's assume that the more militant OSS folks get what they want, and Microsoft tanks due to the availability of free software that does everything that
Varies (Score:2)
I know that "for money" is a motivation for many of those who actually depend on open source in their work environment. If the software doesn't meet their needs, they have to make it meet their needs, or lose money, and that's where the financial motivation exists. With closed source they'd just have to take their losses, which is rarely a big problem but it happens, moreso for some than others.
I'm not yet at a point in my career where m
Open Source? (Score:1)
Maybe people trying to pad their resumes to get a real job?
As a developer who's never in his life been out of work and switches jobs every year or two, I guess I can't understand that.
Re:Open Source? (Score:2)
1. Coding for pay and working on an open source project aren't mutually exclusive. I've worked on open source code for pay, because my employer felt that it would ultimately benefit the company more to open the code than to keep it proprietary. Many of the biggest open-source projects are full-time jobs to at least a few of their developers. But more commonly...
2. Some of us code for fun! And to us, "Why would you work on open source projects when you already have a job?" is like aski
It's Dvorak (Score:2)
Time (Score:2)
Making a difference (Score:3, Interesting)
Now the reason I'm still here many years later, and what motivates me to do a good job is that my work has impact on people's lives. It's nice to see the occasional letter from a patient who thanks us (along with his doctor, to be sure) for saving his life.
Sure, our QA department will remind us from time to time that if we screw up, we can kill people, and that is a *huge* motivator to try to do a good job, but a much larger one is realizing that my code really does improve someone's quality of life.
And for that reason I'd really like to spend the rest of my software career in the medical/biotech field.
Easy (Score:2)
Sex.
Food.
Lack of pain.
But most of us will settle for peer recognition of our prowess in lieu of the above in anticipation of eventually get them directly.