There are many closed source applications that have been removed from the Google Play catalog for various reasons.

Often this reason is the cessation of further development and maintenance of the application.

Why don’t these people make the code open to everyone if they don’t need it anymore?

This could bring great benefits to all people, but everything that was once created simply disappears.

  • KISSmyOS@lemmy.world
    781·
    1 year ago

    Why do people not give away that neglected guitar/motorcycle/boat that’s been sitting unused for free?

    Because one day they’ll get to fixing it up surely, and besides they’ve sunk so much time and money into it that it must still be worth a lot.

    • drcouzelis@lemmy.zipEnglish
      1·
      1 year ago

      I understand your point XD but want to emphasize, software is NOT like tangible items, and any analogy to them will fall flat.

      Giving out the source code to an abandoned application does not mean the original owner doesn’t still have their copy.

      By just dumping the code online, the software has the potential to be worked on by other people. This can benefit everyone, including the original developer.

      Even so, there’s plenty of valid reasons to not do it. Licensing issues (did anyone else work on any part of the project using a different license?), pride (no longer being the “owner”), getting it online (choosing a license, getting it online, it all takes at least some time and effort), or just plain “I don’t want to” are all valid reasons.

  • makingStuffForFun@lemmy.ml
    33·
    1 year ago

    I have projects. Games that were in the google play store. One had hundreds of thousands of downloads. Then Google pulled it as I didn’t maintain it. But, I have to pull artwork out, sound effects, etc that can not be included. And that’s just time. I don’t have much of that, that’s due sure.

  • banana_meccanica@feddit.it
    251·
    1 year ago

    Because their code is a mess, ugly and full of bugs, that is better burn to the roots that trying to fix it.

    • Izzy@lemmy.ml
      61·
      1 year ago

      It would still be nice to look at how someone did something even if implemented poorly to make redevelopment quicker.

      As for why people don’t do this they might just not care or believe they will maybe get back to it again someday even if that is years in the future.

  • zero_iq@lemm.ee
    16·
    1 year ago

    In addition to other reasons already given, commercial software may contain licensed code, libraries, assets, trademarks, and other IP that cannot legally be given away for free, or under an open source licence.

    Sure, it may be possible to strip those things out, but that may leave the software broken or fundamentally changed, and it may be a significant amount of work to do, which am author or publisher is not likely to spend on abandoned software, especially if their free release would compete with any current products.

  • Nighed@sffa.communityEnglish
    11·
    1 year ago

    It’s probably unmaintained because they don’t care any more, or don’t have the time. If they don’t care or have time, they are not going to spend the effort and time required to open source it and publicise that fact

    • Slow@lemmy.todayOP
      1·
      1 year ago

      Isn’t there bad code in the free software world?

      I remember the news when Dwango company decided to open source the Toonz program. On one of the forums I read a lot of criticism about the quality of their code.
      But no one will deny that this is a useful program for artists, even if the program code is not very good.

  • Pantherina@feddit.de
    2·
    1 year ago

    XNViewMP… the dev is basically gone, but they are opposed to OpenSource. XNViewMP is even a QT showcase project, and with opensourcing its features could be easily split up, converted, UI modernized, Wayland adapted etc. Its easier and faster than GIMP, especially for batch image converting and all that. Its great software.

  • selokichtli@lemmy.ml
    2·
    1 year ago

    Maybe you could find some answers if you have a look into apps that actually did what you suggest and see how they did through time. Comes to my mind, for example, Astrid, a to-do app that became FOSS after a good run in the early android days.

  • morhp
    2·
    1 year ago

    Because it’s probably a mess of code copied from multiple dubious sources that would potentially cause legal trouble it it became public.

    Also if there are multiple developers, often including outsourced code or framework code that is licensed under certain conditions, it can be very difficult to get the full rights needed for a relicense. And you don’t gain anything, you just risk that people find bugs or other problems with your code and sue you or make fun of you or whatever.

    Also, many internal code contains private information in the comments, like internal memos, names of employees, internal jokes, and so on, and cleaning that up before a release would take a lot of time.

  • Haui@discuss.tchncs.de
    1·
    1 year ago

    Additional question: wouldn’t it be cool to have a place where you can only get open source stuff? Obviously there needs to be more to it than this fact i presume but its a start.

    • walkercricket@sh.itjust.works
      2·
      1 year ago

      F-Droid isn’t the only one: I also like Neo Store, which has more than just the F-Droid repository and I think has a better interface. However, I think not all repo are 100% safe because F-Droid verify all the apps they have while Neo-Store doesn’t because it simply list known repos, which you can activate however you like in the settings.

    • Pantherina@feddit.de
      1·
      1 year ago

      Lol like

      • F-Droid, izzyondroid
      • Linux repos
      • Git* (Gitlab, Github, various instances)
      • Sourcehut
      • Codeberg
      • random neckbeard Git website