The word “proprietary” has dark connotations in the world of business, and especially computing. It suggests the concepts of being “locked in” and the sacrifice of freedom, evoking emotions of financial indignity and political rebellion.

Something that is “open”, however, is regarded as honest and clean of sin. Proprietary products are often very clever but competitive open products are invariably simpler and cheaper. Compare the Segway scooter (proprietary) to the bicycle (open) – it all makes sense, right? Well, it depends on how much pedalling you are prepared to do, and how much money you have to spare.

The theory of open-source software is that everyone gets a fair crack at producing their own solution without being beholden to a corporate licensor that charges high fees for their technology.

Unfortunately, behind the lofty ideals lies a vast grubby wasteland occupied by users and buyers who often appreciate open source for one thing only: many of the products appear to be free or at least very cheap. Some users no doubt support the movement sincerely, but many others would just as happily install Microsoft Office from a CD-ROM acquired via eBay from Russia. It has little to do with openness – if the Segway cost a tenner, these people would stop buying bicycles.

Commercial software developers have been forced to acknowledge open-source competition, and some are beginning to wise up to what users really like about open source. At the same time, I suspect that other developers have misunderstood what being “open” really means to the great unwashed.

To be specific, I blame the open-source movement for the trend towards scriptable desktop and workgroup applications. These days, I can write cross-platform JavaScript that hooks deep into many of my everyday professional programs, transforming repetitive and mundane tasks into batch processes and performing multifunctional back-flips at the click of a mouse.

Except that I can’t. I’m rubbish at JavaScript, and even after three years of trying, I still haven’t been able to write JavaScript that works. JavaScript looks not so much like a language as the result of a child accidentally spilling a bag of marbles onto the keyboard. Making programs scriptable might be the “open” thing to do, but for users like me, scripting remains a door that is firmly shut.

This has led to a situation in which crowds of thickies like me wander forlornly around user forums, asking for tips and workarounds, only to be told by know-it-alls to write a script to solve the problem. Software publishers think they are being helpful in letting us enhance and customise their software at no cost. But this is little use if we have to pay someone else to do it for us.

Scripting is not an alternative to proprietary systems. It is a heap of bicycle parts, with instructions in Swedish and no Allen key.