Is open--source software really developed more quickly than

>>61633658
Here is the abstract for the paper I found:

http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6462680/

>>61633658
Yes, assuming you mean if the same project would be either open source or closed source.
If no one contributes to your source code, it's the same time as it being closed source. If even someone contributes 1 line, it will have been quicker being open source than closed source.

>>61633658
Sometimes. Depends strongly on what it is. If its something that a lot of developers are interested in (or that a lot of developers just think would be really useful for something they want to do) then you can rustle up a huge community really quickly.

>>61633658

No.

It's been 13 years and counting that freetards haven't implemented thumbnails in Linux.

>>61633760
GUIs are a crutch, Linux doesn't need them.

so what's the best license to not get cucked by people stealing your work for profit?

>>61634372
none, it wouldn't really be free then

>>61634444
QUADS OF TRUTH

>>61633736
more contributors doesn't immediately increase the speed of development.
if several people contribute to an open source project, it will become more effort to organize everything,
compared to a company where there's likely some project lead who manages it.

>>61633658
Yes, there are more developers along with your core devs

>>61634521
If you wanted you could spend the same amount of time organizing. If you wanted you could ignore all the people who wanted to contribute and it would still be the same speed as keeping it closed.

>>61633658
I don't see why you think these are opposing ideals.

Just look at Microsoft. They're releasing more and more FOSS these days that marries perfectly with their cloud and service offerings.