3 ms·
Wow, I was expecting a little more economics in a post titled "the strange economics of OSS." It is too bad the post makes such grand claims without any modicum
by dfc 11y ago
Wow, I was expecting a little more economics in a post titled "the strange economics of OSS." It is too bad the post makes such grand claims without any modicum of effort to back them up with data; these are very interesting research questions. The two most hand wavy claims have to be "it is almost taken for granted that the source code for most software is freely available" and " it is at larger, older firms, that the least amount of open-source software is written." As far as the former goes you really have to ignore Apple's ecosystem, video games and anything related to industrial automation or espionage in order to make such a claim. As far as the latter claim goes IBM, Intel, Oracle, HP, Texas Instruments etc are often at the top of contributions to the Linux kernel by company. To be honest thee latter claim is rather empty without some methodological framework that defines "older company" and "most open source software."
- bduerst 11y agoRight? They could have at least gone into detail about how businesses now follow the model of open-sourcing the software and then making revenue on the implementation fees. Or they could have talked about how open sourcing is part of a race to the bottom. They mention some SQL-like databases, which is a tech that started out as proprietary. How much tech starts immediately as open source?
- nickpsecurity 11y agoOr selling out their users to advertisers for hefty profits while open-sourcing software they use to do it efficiently. ;)
- uxcn 11y agoOr even just Redhat and where the majority of their revenue comes from. I'm actually angry I clicked on this link.
- carterehsmith 11y agoYeah, the post comes across as a random rant about everything, and nothing in particular, just venting out. I guess the op was somewhat drunk or something... we all do that ;)