{"id":13285,"date":"2026-01-19T08:00:00","date_gmt":"2026-01-19T07:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.credativ.de\/blog\/credativ-inside\/what-is-the-difference-between-open-source-and-proprietary-software\/"},"modified":"2026-05-01T08:39:50","modified_gmt":"2026-05-01T06:39:50","slug":"what-is-the-difference-between-open-source-and-proprietary-software","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.credativ.de\/en\/blog\/credativ-inside\/what-is-the-difference-between-open-source-and-proprietary-software\/","title":{"rendered":"What is the difference between open source and proprietary software?"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Open source software differs from proprietary software primarily in the availability of the source code and the licensing. With open source, the source code is freely accessible and can be viewed, modified, and distributed by users. Proprietary software, on the other hand, is distributed with closed source code that belongs exclusively to the manufacturer. These fundamental differences influence costs, flexibility, support, and strategic decisions in companies. In this article, I would like to attempt a comparison of open source software vs. proprietary software.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What does open source software mean and how does it fundamentally differ from proprietary software?<\/h2>\n\n

Open Source Software<\/strong> is software whose source code is publicly accessible and is under licenses that allow users to use, study, modify, and distribute the software. The term “open source” refers to the disclosure of the program code, which promotes transparency and collaboration. <\/p>\n\n

The main differences to proprietary software lie in several areas. With open source, you have access to the source code and can customize the software to your needs. Proprietary software is delivered as a finished product, without insight into the programming or possibilities for modification. <\/p>\n\n

License models differ fundamentally. Open source licenses<\/a> grant comprehensive usage rights and promote further development by the community. Proprietary licenses restrict the use to the conditions specified by the manufacturer and usually prohibit any kind of modification or distribution. <\/p>\n\n

\n
\n

Think free as in free speech<\/a>, not free beer. Richard Stallman<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n

Technically, open-source software is also less likely to infringe upon the user’s soft rights. Most open-source communities strive to adhere to applicable standards, such as Internet RFCs, standardized file formats, etc. Manufacturers of proprietary software, on the other hand, have a vital interest in locking users into their own products and often use so-called extensions of standard protocols that limit interoperability. A typical example would be Microsoft\u00ae Exchange\u00ae, which prefers<\/em> not to communicate with the client via RFC-compliant POP3\/IMAP and similar standard protocols, but rather through its own connection. Users are thus more or less compelled to use a compatible client. <\/p>\n\n

\n
\n

Open Source is not Public Domain<\/h4>\n\n\n\n

On the other hand, open-source software must be distinguished from public domain software. In the case of Public Domain<\/a> in the Anglo-American sphere or Gemeinfreiheit in Germany and the EU<\/a>, the author(s) have relinquished their rights and made the work available to the public for any use. Today, this type of non-license is often represented as CC0<\/em> (CC-Zero)<\/a>. This does not apply to open-source software. Even if the source code is fully available, license terms still apply, regulating what can and cannot be done with it. There is a wide range of such licenses. I\u2019ve already touched on the most important open-source licenses<\/a> in this article. <\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

\n
\n
\"CC0<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n
<\/div>\n\n

Not every software with source code is open source<\/h4>\n\n

The headline might be a bit confusing, but it has a clear background. There is also software that the manufacturer releases as open source \u2013 meaning with the intention that anyone can read the code, potentially improve it, and find errors \u2013 but the license restricts the user so much that they can do little or nothing more with the code than simply take note of it. The list of available open-source licenses is significantly longer than the list recognized as such by relevant open-source associations. Criteria here are which rights the user gains with the license and which are denied. This has nothing to do with a price for use. <\/p>\n\n

What are the advantages and disadvantages of open source and proprietary software for companies?<\/h2>\n\n

Open source software offers companies significant cost advantages, as there are usually no license fees and the software can be used freely. Flexibility is another important advantage \u2013 you can have the software adapted or extended to your specific business requirements. Likewise, the number of installed workstations is generally irrelevant. <\/p>\n\n

Community support for open source projects is often very active. Developers worldwide contribute to the improvement, security vulnerabilities are quickly discovered and fixed. At the same time, however, this also means that you may need technical expertise to get support or make adjustments. <\/p>\n\n

Proprietary software scores with professional manufacturer support and clear guarantees. You receive defined support with Service Level Agreements and can contact the manufacturer directly in case of problems. The software is usually ready for immediate use and well documented. <\/p>\n\n

The challenges with open source often lie in the need for own technical competence or external support. In the last 25 years, however, a broad market of providers has developed, who are happy to help if customers have to buy support promises for compliance reasons<\/a>. With proprietary software, on the other hand, you are dependent on the manufacturer and have less control over development and customization. <\/p>\n\n

Vendor Lock-in<\/h4>\n\n

The latter situation in particular, combined with the tendency of commercial vendors to use technical means to keep customers tied to their products, leads to what is known as vendor lock-in<\/a>. This refers to a situation where the effort or cost of switching from one product to another is so high that users prefer to put up with the vendor\u2019s ever-rising costs. Examples of this abound. Especially in the brave new world of the cloud, providers often aim to offer an environment that cannot be easily replicated. Genuine open-source-based projects do not exhibit this tendency. Ultimately, the volunteer community does not care whether an individual user adopts the product or not. Of course, seeing a project succeed is a great feeling, but many smaller projects are created to solve a specific problem and are made publicly available to help others find a solution. <\/p>\n\n

How do the different license models work for open source and proprietary software?<\/h2>\n\n

Open source licenses<\/strong> regulate how the software may be used, modified and distributed. The GPL (General Public License) is one of the best-known licenses and requires that derived works also be published under the GPL. This is referred to as “Copyleft.” <\/p>\n\n

The MIT license is more permissive and allows the code to be used in proprietary products as long as the license text is retained. The Apache license offers similar freedoms as MIT, but contains additional provisions on patent rights. <\/p>\n\n

I have already created a comparison of the most common open source licenses<\/a> in another article.<\/p>\n\n

Proprietary license structures are more restrictive. You buy or rent the right to use, but are not allowed to view or modify the code. Compliance requirements for open source mainly concern compliance with the license terms, especially if you further develop software or integrate it into your own products. <\/p>\n\n

For companies, it is important to understand the license terms exactly in order to avoid legal problems. This is especially true when combining different open source components or when developing own software on an open source basis. In case of doubt, we recommend consulting a specialized legal advisor.<\/p>\n\n

When should companies choose open source and when proprietary software?<\/h2>\n\n

The decision depends on several factors. Open source is particularly suitable if you need flexibility, want to reduce costs and have technical expertise or can purchase it. If standard functions are sufficient and you prefer proven solutions, proprietary software may be the better choice. <\/p>\n\n

Budget considerations play an important role. Open source reduces license costs, but can cause higher implementation and maintenance costs, especially initially. Proprietary software has clear license costs, but often lower implementation risks. It is also often the case that technicians trained by the manufacturer are already available from external service providers in the proprietary software environment. However, it is not necessarily useful to always base the decision on the current cost situation. In addition to a TCO consideration over the entire life cycle of a software system, it can also be useful in a risk assessment, contrary to the initial cost situation, to reduce the dependence on manufacturers. <\/p>\n\n

Strategic goals influence the choice. If independence from manufacturers, adaptability and long-term control are important, this speaks for open source. If you prefer fast implementation and predictable costs, proprietary software may be more advantageous. <\/p>\n\n

Your technical expertise is crucial. If you have experienced IT specialists or use professional open source support<\/a>, you can fully exploit the advantages of open source. Without these resources, proprietary software is in some cases the more practical solution. <\/p>\n\n

How does credativ\u00ae support companies with open source software solutions?<\/h2>\n\n

credativ\u00ae<\/a> has been offering professional support for open source software for over 20 years, replacing the missing manufacturer support with comprehensive support for the entire software lifecycle. Our service includes technical support at manufacturer level with guaranteed Service Level Agreements. <\/p>\n\n

Our specific services include:<\/p>\n\n