A Juxtaposition of Open Source and Closed Operating Systems

Ever since the ability of computers to host multiple and individual users, the machines have run using some sort of operating system. These systems have most obviously varied in terms of sophistication, capacity, and (of course) aesthetics. Despite these variations, they all nevertheless support a computer's basic functions, such as scheduling tasks, executing applications, and controlling peripherals. Perhaps the most importance difference is the way in which their codes are protected and distributed to the market population. This distinction is the dividing line between open source and closed source operating systems.

Closed source operating systems (or, proprietary software) are most prevalent in the software market. Under this model, the code running behind the operating system is considered a “trade secret”, and therefore not released in its raw form to the public. Instead, the software is written and maintained by teams within the individual companies, and then released in a “compiled-executable state” (St. Laurent, 2008, p. 4). This essentially means that the public is able to use the software without making any substantive changes to the code.

In complete contrast, open source operating systems are not only released in an executable state. Instead, the source code itself is made available to users and consumers. By purchasing (or often times downloading for free) the software, users receive the right to change and “play with” the source code, making it completely customizable. This type of software is deemed “open source” not simply because of the access to source code, but because it is often developed on a collaborative basis. Because of the cooperative effort, open source software makes for licensing with extremely relaxed or completely non-existent copyright restrictions (Shell, 2005).

There are several prominent examples of both of these types of operating systems. The most obvious examples of closed source operating systems are found in Microsoft and Apple. Microsoft distributes its Windows operating system to many PCs, as well as sells the software individually. Apple, in the same way, loads their own operating systems (such as Mountain Lion for Macintosh computers and iOS5 for iPhones) on their devices. On the other hand, free and open source operating systems are also widely distributed, being used on many kinds of devices. The two most prominent examples of open source operating systems are Linux and Berkely Software Distribution (BSD), both Unix-based software packages. These operating systems are loaded manually onto millions of servers, destktop computers, and even smartphones.

It is important to note that the performance of each type of system seems to be relatively comparable. According to a study by Diomidis Spinellis (2008), a comparison of BSD, Linux, Solaris, and Windows found that the organization and code structure was the same across the four systems (p. 381). Therefore, even if the development of the coding is different, the different kinds of systems operate similarly.

The main difference between the two types of operating systems is their business models – that is, the way in which they are commercialized. Closed source software companies create an artificial scarcity on their product by placing copyrights on the use of their system. In other words, users are actually paying to use the software, rather than for the software itself. Companies that produce open source software, in turn, provide their software for free. Instead, they charge for their support services. Alternatively, collaboratively (rather than commercially produced software is often supported by donations. While there are many more comparisons to be made, these are the basic similarities and differences between open source and closed source operating systems.