As the open source world is fairly advanced now and you can find an open source implementation of pretty much everything, why are people/developers still using the obscure/proprietary libraries? In what case these are absolutely needed?

closed as primarily opinion-based by gnat, Thomas Owens Mar 1 '18 at 11:26

Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.


Three obvious reasons:

  1. There's no open source equivalent,
  2. The company wants paid-for support that they can rely on.
  3. They are a bit behind the times and do not yet trust open source libraries.
  • 5
    4. their customer mandates use of a particular tech – jk. Mar 1 '18 at 11:33
  • 13
    5. The only open source equivalent is GPL licensed and the company is unwilling to open up their own code. – Bart van Ingen Schenau Mar 1 '18 at 12:23
  • 8
    6. The choice was made in the past, long before anything remotely useful was available as open source, and it would be a risky, costly waste of time and resources to open up the application and link it to something different. – Martin Maat Mar 1 '18 at 13:48
  • 6
    7. The proprietary version is simply better – Sean Burton Mar 1 '18 at 14:42
  • And, if you to work for a company that is so large that other companies are formed just to figure out new ways to sue you, then you may run into push-back from your own legal department. Getting their approval to use open-source code might cost your team more than it costs to license a commercial version or even, to just write the ****ed thing from scratch. – Solomon Slow Mar 1 '18 at 15:59

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.