It means that you only have access to the compiled binaries of the program (the files on your system) and not to the source code.
Which means that you cannot see why and how the program functions the way it does. You can try and reverse engineer it or decompile it, but it will be different from the original code.
As you stated, you can’t fork it either because you don’t have access to the original source control.
It’s interesting to have closed source for some use cases, (sensitive or top secrets programs for instance) but open source should definitely be the default rather than the exception in my opinion.
And with open source code, you have the right to copy and modify the code, and distribute your own copies of the original, or the modified code. Try that with closed source code and you’ll get a nice C&D shortly.
It means that you only have access to the compiled binaries of the program (the files on your system) and not to the source code.
Which means that you cannot see why and how the program functions the way it does. You can try and reverse engineer it or decompile it, but it will be different from the original code. As you stated, you can’t fork it either because you don’t have access to the original source control.
Idk why but this close source stuff feels shady thanks for answering my question
That’s how most companies operate.
It’s interesting to have closed source for some use cases, (sensitive or top secrets programs for instance) but open source should definitely be the default rather than the exception in my opinion.
And with open source code, you have the right to copy and modify the code, and distribute your own copies of the original, or the modified code. Try that with closed source code and you’ll get a nice C&D shortly.
Well, that vastly depends on the license it’s under but yeah, that’s the gist of it !