Not at all. Closed source is more difficult to service, maintain and modify. Open Source provides complete transparency. Open source software is neither good or bad but simply a set of license terms and conditions that dictate how the software needs to be licensed if it is modified and redistributed. One reason developers can modify it in the first place is that the underlying source code--rather than just an executable file--is distribted as one of these terms and conditions (depending on whose definition you use there are either 4 or 10 of these terms and conditions and there are all kinds of variations--dozens if not hundreds--of open source licenses).
Open source software is designed to do exactly what its closed source (paid software) counterpart is to do. Open Office for example is free to use and does the same thing as Microsoft office that costs hundreds.
Open source software is software that allows the source code to be used. Oftentimes, they are free to use. Open source software is copyrighted.
None. All software should be free and open source.
I prefer open source software.
No. Although the software developer may choose to charge or not to charge for a copy of the software, the open-source nature of OSS primarily dictates about how the source code should be distributed.
Open source software allows anybody to revise and reformat the software to suit their individual needs. Open source software is usually developed together and publically.
no....because an open source software is distributed for free
The answer is in the question itself. Open-source software has it's source code available to everyone. Closed-source software does not.
Open Source Software Institute was created in 2000.
solaris is open source
New Open Source application software is introduced every day.
Often, Open Source software is provided free of charge. But always check.