Are you more likely to use something because it is open source?

Depends if it's for work or personal.

For personal use, yes, as I do have a poke around in the source code as well its immediate project artefacts and community (if exists) to get an idea of project health and trustworthiness.

For work, not necessarily. I'd want to go for the most convenient option possible, that comes close to requirements and has a sufficient popularity. In some cases that might be an open source project, but even then it might be paid for by virtue of being managed by AWS, for example.

Not quite. I'm more likely to take a risk in using a smaller or less mature piece of tech if it is open source.

The thinking there is that if the project or company behind it fail, at least I can continue to use the tech while making a plan to maintain it or migrate away.

It's unclear if that's a sound reason or just an intuitive take.

Yes.

I lean more toward open source, especially if it has a big community. If I have to do something for work and there are no popular open source tools, I'll go for something that managed by a reliable company.

Definitely. Especially if I'm going to spend lots of time learning it. For me, open source means:

- I have a visibility in to code, issues, features, development.

- I can eventually fork the project or use someone's fork if the main project becomes obsolete. I can also keep using the obsolete version forever. For SASS software, I can't rely on it forever.

- There is an option I eventually contribute.

- There is a greater chance of having a community with lots of blog posts, docs & Questions & answers online.

- No mandatory recurring payments.

Yes, but probably more because it usually means I retain control of my own data, rather than allowing some third-party to collect it all.

I don't have the skills to audit code myself, but I like things that run locally rather than backing up on somebody else's computer in a honeypot somewhere.

[delayed]

Yes, but only if there is an executable or installer I can save in my downloads folder and use again in a few years.

I got burned by WikidPad, an open source personal wiki, which I've been using for a decade or more. The 2012 windows installer still works great, but the source code on Linux is effectively worthless because of breaking changes in the WxWindows library it depends on. Initially it seems to work but only later do you realize that none of the dialog boxes work, effectively killing its utility.

Yes. The community is just much better.

In the area of security, if the software is closed source, I don’t use it. The code has to be open to inspection.

Developer tools --- Yes

Business solutions --- No

A few examples --- US payroll. There is no competent open source solution that I am aware of.

Bill payment/money transfer --- Any mistake can be time consuming and costly to correct.

There is lots of business software and services where open source is unavailable or does not present a practical, trustworthy solution IMO. A common thread that seems to run through a lot of these cases is liability.

Yes, postman was the last of them I was cheated. No more. Except Jetbrains products.

Definitely, yes!

Because two things - first, I like when people are bold enough to show code, second, because closed source does not guarantee from mistakes, in many cases definitely otherwise.

Of course. You don't need to investigate the license, learn about the vendor, inquire about payment structure, talk to sales people, justify the purchase to your manager, etc. There's much less friction, all thing being equal.

No.

For library usage, yes.

When I want the code, yes.

For everything else, no, never impact my decision.

Yes, except things mostly made by a single company, especially if it is VC founded.