I just thought I'd start this thread to ask other developers about their opinion on the matter.
I spent many hours across several weeks reverse engineering the Samsung Galaxy S flashing protocol and then programming, testing and distributing Heimdall as open-source software.
Based on bandwidth consumption Heimdall has been downloaded anywhere between 2000 and 8000 times (depending on whether the source or binaries were downloaded). I have received no more than eight donations, a very sincere thank-you goes out to those eight people! Let's assume that 25% of the total number of downloads were repeat downloaders, so we have somewhere between 1500 and 6000 unique users. So only 0.134-0.534% of users actually donate. Those sorts of donation rates are barely able to cover the cost of bandwidth, if at all.
I know there are a lot of people out there who consider themselves avid supporters of open-source and open-source software. I wouldn't necessarily call myself one of those people, however I do believe there is definitely a time and a place for open-source software, Heimdall being a perfect example.
I also know a lot of people who distribute ROMs, apps, tools, mods etc. are hobbyists who do what they do in their spare time, and the community should be very thankful of that. As for myself, I work as a independent software/games developer, not particularly the most monetarily rewarding profession around.
As much as we do enjoy releasing free software for the community, it is difficult for developers such as myself to justify the work involved when there is little to no return, after all the bills need to be paid somehow.
My question is this, is it possible for developers releasing open-source software directly to the community, not large corporations, to make a living off their work? Furthermore, how do we encourage community members to give back to developers who have donated their time to the community?
Can't you use Google Code instead for hosting? or SourceForge? all provide free bandwidth IIRC.
Don't expect any donations as a rule, if you are expecting profit then either use ads on your website or charge.
I would have thought the primary reason for developing OSS on your phone is to improve the product you originally bought.
Cheers,
MiG
If you want free hosting, I can hook you up at http://www.sgscompilebox.dreamhosters.com/ that I'm paying for anyway for z4mod. Unlimited bandwidth/space. Offer goes out to anybody who wants to host anything for the SGS.
EDIT: Oh, and to answer your question: No, I don't believe it's possible to make a living off making 3rd party open source tools that only a fraction(technical users) of a device's users will use. If you want to make a living off open source, the best bet is through a company such as Canonical, or by creating applications focused at casual users with as much potential marketshare as possible. Or do what most people do: get a regular 'closed' job, and do open source stuff as a hobby.
MiG- said:
Can't you use Google Code instead for hosting? or SourceForge? all provide free bandwidth IIRC.
Don't expect any donations as a rule, if you are expecting profit then either use ads on your website or charge.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't think you fully understand what I'm trying to discuss. The bandwidth costs are fairly negligible, especially if I'm approximately able to cover the costs with just eight donations. A developers time however is substantially more expensive, and in some ways the effort and intention is priceless
I'm not expecting profit as such, nor do I particularly wish this discussion to center around myself (I'm just using my statistics as an example). I'm just curious to know whether people think it is possible to be a "sustainable" open-source developer who contributes software directly to a community? As opposed to large open-source products targeted towards large corporations who pay technical support contracts.
I'm also not a big fan off stuffing ads down the throat of my user-base. Also, in this particular context I seriously doubt that sort of approach would work, especially if third-party free hosting (sourceforge, github etc.) is used.
MiG- said:
I would have thought the primary reason for developing OSS on your phone is to improve the product you originally bought.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not necessarily. In my particular case I've simply released a tool to further enable the community to do something that other users (myself included) could already do, in some capacity or another.
For most developers releasing open-source software isn't so much about improving something they own. It's more about providing something for a community to use and benefit from without constraints. It's not unreasonable to ask the community to support you in return. After all there is nothing that forces developers to ever release the software they develop, unless you've used GPL code which is another matter entirely.
MiG-, based on your answer I'm assuming you're saying, no you do not think it's possible, which is definitely a perfectly valid answer to questions I've asked. Although I would definitely love to hear what more community members, particularly developers, have to say about the topic.
RyanZA said:
If you want free hosting, I can hook you up at http://www.sgscompilebox.dreamhosters.com/ that I'm paying for anyway for z4mod. Unlimited bandwidth/space. Offer goes out to anybody who wants to host anything for the SGS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Bit of topic.. you can host roms?
DocRambone said:
Bit of topic.. you can host roms?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Until someone stops me, sure.
RyanZA said:
EDIT: Oh, and to answer your question: No, I don't believe it's possible to make a living off making 3rd party open source tools that only a fraction(technical users) of a device's users will use. If you want to make a living off open source, the best bet is through a company such as Canonical, or by creating applications focused at casual users with as much potential marketshare as possible. Or do what most people do: get a regular 'closed' job, and do open source stuff as a hobby.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with pretty much everything except the part about targeting casual users in order to make money. In my experience technically inclined users, who have an appreciation for a piece of software, are substantially more likely to donate that casual users who lack the knowledge of the work involved. Of course selling software is something that can be more easily achieved when targeting a casual user base, especially if they know nothing of piracy. However it is generally not possible to sell "open-source" software directly.
Benjamin Dobell said:
I agree with pretty much everything except the part about targeting casual users in order to make money. In my experience technically inclined users, who have an appreciation for a piece of software, are substantially more likely to donate that casual users who lack the knowledge of the work involved. Of course selling software is something that can be more easily achieved when targeting a casual user base, especially if they know nothing of piracy. However it is generally not possible to sell "open-source" software directly.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Of course it is. Why do you think all of these app stores and market place etc is all catching on? You're never going to get rich off it, but putting up a popular open source application with an advert (and the option to turn it off even) should be able to bring in a pretty good revenue! Social networking seems to do the best for these types of apps.
Also, you'd probably want to diversify if relying on ad money - one banner ad in 25 open source apps, with 100K users each could easily reach a lot of money. And it should be possible to crank out a simple, well made open source app that serves a definite purpose in under 3 months. So with some time investment, in a couple years you'd be able to live off it. No different from closed sourced apps when you you use advertising.
Most important thing though is to make something that
1) the average user understands what it does
2) does the job as simply as possible
3) actually helps the user
4) has as wide a potential market as possible
You could look at firefox as the ultimate in this type of thing.
This is all a lot of work though, I'm sure, and if you're after money, a regular desk job is almost guaranteed to work out better.
RyanZA said:
Of course it is. Why do you think all of these app stores and market place etc is all catching on? You're never going to get rich off it, but putting up a popular open source application with an advert (and the option to turn it off even) should be able to bring in a pretty good revenue! Social networking seems to do the best for these types of apps.
Also, you'd probably want to diversify if relying on ad money - one banner ad in 25 open source apps, with 100K users each could easily reach a lot of money. And it should be possible to crank out a simple, well made open source app that serves a definite purpose in under 3 months. So with some time investment, in a couple years you'd be able to live off it. No different from closed sourced apps when you you use advertising.
Most important thing though is to make something that
1) the average user understands what it does
2) does the job as simply as possible
3) actually helps the user
4) has as wide a potential market as possible
You could look at firefox as the ultimate in this type of thing.
This is all a lot of work though, I'm sure, and if you're after money, a regular desk job is almost guaranteed to work out better.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed, I mostly meant that it's difficult to "sell" open-source software. If your software is truly open-source then users are likely to download it, compile it and then redistribute it for free, which is sort of reasonable given that it's meant to be open source.
However advertising in a free application is slightly different than selling an application and it does have a lot more potential to succeed. However depending on what you mean by "putting up a popular open source application" I might have moral issues with that. Unless the popular application is your own or you've substantially modified (added a UI etc) to an existing piece of open-source software. Although a lot less likely to happen if your app is free, if it is open-source there is still the chance someone else will distribute it for free, unless of course the non-code assets aren't open.
I definitely do believe that at the moment it would be extremely difficult if not impossible to live off the type of open-source software I initially described. It's a bit saddening though to realise how massively one falls short, hopefully this will change in the future.
About those donations. If I would use it, I would probably donate.
I worked my a** of for the community, providing ROMs and kitchens for 3 years for the HTC S710 and S740 and I got about 4 or 5 donations over that period of time. Sometimes it get's very frustrating, but hang in there, it's worth it after all (there would be no WM 6.5 on the Vox or the Rose without me (dare I say that ), but I wanted it anyway, so I made it and just released it for others as well)!
PS: SAP r3 is open source and it sells veeeeeery good
I think the community can recognize such invaluable work & devote a part of their donations to them, if they are using his software & really think its worth.
I think however small percentage it could be, it would make the developer feel wanted & make him continue devoting his valuable time.
I just read an article either today or yesterday regarding a conference of software developers for android community, & when one developer went to the podium & said he is earning a steady $1-$2 per day, people actually laughed. He retorted, THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE GOOD. Android hasn't penetrated the markets YET like iPhone. So awareness & earnings are still low.
BTW, a nice GUI would change everything.
Just my 2 cents worth.
PS : In continuation to RyanZA's talk, I would like to mention that if you think you have something worth using, MAKE A LOT of noise about it. THAT's how people notice, use & donate. No one can understand a software's worth until you tell them. Like some WWii prime minister said, if you want the world to understand what you are telling, tell it like you are telling a donkey.
Ben, I think you need to differentiate between recognition, fame & money. Ideas are many have you tried http://www.ideaken.com/ ?
Benjamin Dobell said:
Agreed, I mostly meant that it's difficult to "sell" open-source software. If your software is truly open-source then users are likely to download it, compile it and then redistribute it for free, which is sort of reasonable given that it's meant to be open source.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Most companies "built on open-source" provide binaries, and real support for those binaries, and earn a living from that. In an enterprise environment giving support can earn a lot of money (mainly because a lot of companies have policies to only use software/hardware that has decent support). On my last job we had to use a really crappy software, just because the (really) good alternative didn't had a support center in our country.
For the casual users: the marketplaces + ads are a good place to start. If you manage to create something that casual users will use, then it might pay of. Those users don't actaully care about the software being FOSS or not. Actually there aren't many people who care how free an application really is (except for most people working in IT or similar)
If bandwidth is an issue then host it over megaupload and such, problem solved.
ragin said:
BTW, a nice GUI would change everything.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And give users the ability to think they are actually a power user. Most people here at xda can't write even simple scripts, but they do want to try out new and experimental stuff. (on the other hand there are a lot of users who want things that just work, for them give a simple gui saying: "DO DA STUFF")
EarlZ said:
If bandwidth is an issue then host it over megaupload and such, problem solved.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I hate when people upload source code to megaupload. There's github, code.google.com and sf.net. sf.net is although quite old now, the other too are still great when it comes to hosting FOSS stuff.
Github is even nicer since they've added a big "Download" button for the end users.
Earlier this week I looked through countless posts and information pertaining to 4.4 Kit Kat on my GNex. As I looked at post after post and did my trial and error trying to find the right ROM for me, finally settling on Beanstalk, I realized just how amazing the support can be around here. From KitKang to SlimKat it is nothing but help when someone has an issue. All issues discussed, all issues looked at.
Then you have Google. Supportive... for new models only. The GNex has a great following and continued support of Devs here on XDA yet Google considers it too old to mess with and just ignores it. Petitions, outcry, and begging for Kit Kat and yet they still ignore it.
As I look at all the development projects I wonder why Google doesn't utilize the community more. Yes, I understand legality behind it and the need to pay the devs to do what they do if they used them. Still, in situations like the GNex when people want it like they do why not just Utilize the dev community. If they really just don't want to waste time on development with a 2 yo phone why not just outsource. Give these amazing Devs a chance. Look through the independent builds find one that suits the specifications needed and give that Dev team some support.
How many Devs here wouldn't jump at a chance to create a build for what is considered a outdated unsupportable phone, like the GNex, for Google who just doesn't want to waste resources on it. Take $10,000 and say "Hey, you want this phone supported create a build and you could get this $10k and your build sent out as a non-carrier update" Sure that is a small amount for Google but an amazing boost for a Dev doing what he loves. Saves Google time and Resources and gives us, that either lack the time or the ability too create a build, a strong build to keep our phone going for those 6 months to a Year before our upgrade time.
You have people like me that bought the GNex 4 months before the Nexus 4 came out but I am on Verizon and can't get a newer Nexus. You also have people that bought it a knowing nothing about the phone that ended up loving it but are stuck in a 2 year contract but would love to keep it running like new but are afraid to do anything like we do here because of their contracts. I just think a program like that would be helpful
To all the Devs out there working hard, keep it up. I love the choices and I love to test the new builds no matter how buggy they may be. Many Thanks go to all of you and all your hard work.
check out my thread on the Google's 18 Month window policy for updated and how its compared to apple
and the Nexus S
I've used the stock rom (android 10) which came on the device, and the Malaysk is what i'm currently running (not paid for as I don't agree with forced payments for roms!) and it is still very laggy and stuff doesn't seem to work.
I've not updated for about 9 months, is there any new roms available (presuming we're talking stock roms since there only seems to be two russian guys making these roms and Hal9k still only has his old Android 9 rom)
How does the Hal9k android 9 rom compare? is it better performance/less bugs etc? compared to stock 10/Malaysk ?
Thanks in advance.
if you don't agree to pay someone else's work, keep the original rom
or make one yourself free for all
entirely not the point, but thanks for your input.
pakoner said:
if you don't agree to pay someone else's work, keep the original rom
or make one yourself free for all
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I see this reply used alot; the comment avoids the OPs comments entirely and the issues around these paid roms, including things like lack of support and the fact that they do not contribute to the advancement of the forums.
Try commenting on topic, addressing the points raised instead of confirming biases.
The fact is they take others work, modify the stock rom and then charge for it.
Coming back on topic, there's generally no need for these modified roms, as the mods/issues they address are no longer an issue (e.g. use a USB OBD), or issues such as speed dependant volume, can be found in launchers or installable apps.
Well there is if people have an older rom unit and want to upgrade it with a more up to date rom with fewer bugs and more inbuilt options.
That said, newer options and features worth having are still few and far between. It seems only car manufactures are able to develop their own units with features that work which do address peoples needs.
For anyone with an older car or a car lacking a good head unit, people have few options. Of course its a far cry from tape players and a readers digest atlas. But once purchased these universal units have so little support or upgrade options people are very much at the mercy of independent developers.
Thankfully these few people are willing to share their knowledge and skill for all. While they might only tinker with what came before, their upgrades and developments are still at their own pace - and thats their choice. If they charge a few quid for some of it then so what. Be gratefull we have them still at all.
Because what really is a shame is that there are now too few skilled developers like them. And that IS the problem. A few years ago developers for phone roms were ten a penny with good healthy competition and a huge influx of ideas and knowledge.
Sadly there are more and more people today with such skills only interested in developing for cash rewards by advertisers on the back of malware or worthless apps.
Those few that do try to help such as those here in the forums, even if they make a charge, do make some progress and share with all. Remember they are also constrained and rely heavily on far more restrictive and less supportive google tools these days than they were.
The real shame is there just isn't enough of them.
Does it seem like Google is attempting to push custom ROMs away from, or off of, their newer devices (Pixel 6 Pro)? From what I can gather reading the forums there are a lot of examples of custom ROMs that have onerous problems. But, maybe that is just the nature of the business, people tend to only post when they are having difficulties.
kcv_earner said:
Does it seem like Google is attempting to push custom ROMs away from, or off of, their newer devices (Pixel 6 Pro)? From what I can gather reading the forums there are a lot of examples of custom ROMs that have onerous problems. But, maybe that is just the nature of the business, people tend to only post when they are having difficulties.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't think Google cares one way or another about custom roms. I don't think they do anything with custom roms in mind.
Lughnasadh said:
I don't think Google cares one way or another about custom roms. I don't think they do anything with custom roms in mind.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This.
Google does what is in their best favor, not for the niche hobbyists. Over the years, you could see the gradual move to making ROM developers lives more complicated.
Google could very easily move away from custom development if they wanted to. All they'd have to do is move to a private license and ditch the apache and gpl open source licenses and keep all source code private. This will never happen as part of the open source platform is contributions from users across the world to improve things. Technically they could release very little device specific source as well and it wouldn't be the end all.
My first phone I developed for was a Samsung Infuse 4g. Development stopped at gingerbread and Samsung never released ICS (android 4) for the infuse due to the almost complete overhaul needed. So no device source and no kernel source from Samsung. Guess what? Within a month or so myself and a few other developers had a nearly fully functional (think there was 1 or 2 very minor bugs) infuse 4g running ICS and kept going from there.
scott.hart.bti said:
Google could very easily move away from custom development if they wanted to. All they'd have to do is move to a private license and ditch the apache and gpl open source licenses and keep all source code private. This will never happen as part of the open source platform is contributions from users across the world to improve things. Technically they could release very little device specific source as well and it wouldn't be the end all.
My first phone I developed for was a Samsung Infuse 4g. Development stopped at gingerbread and Samsung never released ICS (android 4) for the infuse due to the almost complete overhaul needed. So no device source and no kernel source from Samsung. Guess what? Within a month or so myself and a few other developers had a nearly fully functional (think there was 1 or 2 very minor bugs) infuse 4g running ICS and kept going from there.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Those were the good ol' days. I miss those times a lot.
scott.hart.bti said:
Google could very easily move away from custom development if they wanted to. All they'd have to do is move to a private license and ditch the apache and gpl open source licenses and keep all source code private. This will never happen as part of the open source platform is contributions from users across the world to improve things. Technically they could release very little device specific source as well and it wouldn't be the end all.
My first phone I developed for was a Samsung Infuse 4g. Development stopped at gingerbread and Samsung never released ICS (android 4) for the infuse due to the almost complete overhaul needed. So no device source and no kernel source from Samsung. Guess what? Within a month or so myself and a few other developers had a nearly fully functional (think there was 1 or 2 very minor bugs) infuse 4g running ICS and kept going from there.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Apart from the interest Google has in open and free contributors to the code, would that be legally possible for them to privatize and "close" Android code for Pixels given it is based on Linux? Would that fit the open source license of the original Linux platform?
scott.hart.bti said:
Google could very easily move away from custom development if they wanted to. All they'd have to do is move to a private license and ditch the apache and gpl open source licenses and keep all source code private. This will never happen as part of the open source platform is contributions from users across the world to improve things. Technically they could release very little device specific source as well and it wouldn't be the end all.
My first phone I developed for was a Samsung Infuse 4g. Development stopped at gingerbread and Samsung never released ICS (android 4) for the infuse due to the almost complete overhaul needed. So no device source and no kernel source from Samsung. Guess what? Within a month or so myself and a few other developers had a nearly fully functional (think there was 1 or 2 very minor bugs) infuse 4g running ICS and kept going from there.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you all for the reply to my question. The reason I brought it up was because I was looking for any LOS 19 working for the Pixel 6 Pro. I was earlier directed to this one, but dev has changed.
neelchauhan said:
I am no longer working on this ROM. A13 blocks downgrading the bootloader. If you still want this, there are developer support images to downgrade with an updated bootloader.
To add, newer LOS19 builds don't boot on raviole, even the recovery fails.
I also switched to stock A13 for the time being.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
kcv_earner said:
Thank you all for the reply to my question. The reason I brought it up was because I was looking for any LOS 19 working for the Pixel 6 Pro. I was earlier directed to this one, but dev has changed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I wouldn't risk trying an a12 rom if you got a13 installed.
Custom roms are dieing for sure. The people left over are un friendly the builds nearly allways have bugs hence the amount of wingers the devs get which turns the devs into rude people. Majority of them have private sources they won't share. There dodgey ****s. I attempted to build a rom and failed and couldn't get any help. Instead every rom dev will ban u if u ask for help building there rom. Telegram is a **** storm. Mods on power trips. I have given up on the scene. Let it die with wild fire.
I start understand now a crew of 5 guys will never beat a company at there game. They might apply some patches or shot before the real devs release the proper os version but it not worth the actual bugs in the frame work. Who can trust the security of a team of guys to. They can do what they like to us from messing with the os put virus in it.
fil3s said:
I wouldn't risk trying an a12 rom if you got a13 installed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As long as the A13 bootloader is installed to both slots, the worst that could happen is the firmware would run poorly.