Picture this: you're using an app on your phone - doesn't matter what it runs; most probably it's one of the big two smartphone options, or a "dumbphone"; even if it's one of the niche players, odds are good the following scenario plays out: the app you're using fails. It's annoying, it may even be a showstopper. Maybe you can find another one that does the same thing, maybe better, maybe not. The point is, even though you have the illusion of choice, you aren't truly free to try and fix it yourself, not to mention you may never be able to get your information out of it.
This alone should be enough motivation to not just use, but contribute to open source. It empowers the users, and let's face it, we're all users these days. Beyond that, there is also the factor of giving back, or making a mark, making something of lasting worth. Sure, proprietary software is worth something - until you can't use it anymore because you don't have the source, and it either won't run on your platform, or has issues that make it unusable.
I myself am not a big open source developer - I mainly find bugs in products I use and contribute patches back (I'm a pretty good fixer ;). The difference between open and closed source? I can make a change to the software I use.
This alone should be enough motivation to not just use, but contribute to open source. It empowers the users, and let's face it, we're all users these days. Beyond that, there is also the factor of giving back, or making a mark, making something of lasting worth. Sure, proprietary software is worth something - until you can't use it anymore because you don't have the source, and it either won't run on your platform, or has issues that make it unusable.
I myself am not a big open source developer - I mainly find bugs in products I use and contribute patches back (I'm a pretty good fixer ;). The difference between open and closed source? I can make a change to the software I use.