But if anyone even dares to mention open source or getting ahold of the source it is immediately shot down for whatever legit reason and thats fine but the problem still,no matter youre argument, orbiter is not being developed in such a way in order to be attractive to new users.
Orbiter is one guy's project, and last I heard, it was a hobby, not a day job. So, yeah, it's not going to develop at a breakneck pace, the development will focus on things that matter to Martin, not necessarily things that might attract people to Orbiter. And eventually Martin will either have higher priorities and move on, or grow old and become too ill and/or dead to work on it, or suffer an accident and become too injured and/or dead to work on it. That's just a fact of life.
As for open sourcing it: Yeah, it would be nice, I would certainly prefer that all software be open source, and open sourcing it would probably speed up the pace of development (as well as providing insurance for the community against something happening to Martin), but in the end it's not commercial software, nor is it being used in mission critical applications, so Orbiter being closed source doesn't create the customer-abusive situations that motivate my pro-open-source attitudes regarding most other types of software. So, since there's nothing really huge at stake, we can ask nicely that Orbiter be open sourced, but if Martin doesn't want to do it, there's no use pestering him or complaining if it doesn't happen. It's rude, and it's not important enough to be rude over. We need our energy to fight for open source in things like operating systems, cell phone firmware, self-driving cars, and other things where the current closed-source trends could do actual, severe harm to society in the long run.
All in all, did you really have to necro this thread to make this rant?