4 ms·
Most insightful comment in this mishmash. I'll say it again for future searchers of wisdom: Open Source is not a Business Model.
by eyan 10y ago
Most insightful comment in this mishmash.
I'll say it again for future searchers of wisdom: Open Source is not a Business Model.
- anigbrowl 10y agoYeah yeah but that doesn't solve the problem of programmers needing to eat and pay rent, so I guess the answer is why not? If people can't afford to to invest time in writing OSS even if it's widely respected and reused, then that limits the development of open source. I mean here's this guy with a ~25 year body of work which everyone agrees to be of pretty high quality and he's broke. That ain't right. Saying 'it's not a business model' is basically equivalent to saying 'I don't have to worry about money.'
- wpietri 10y agoNot at all. Closed source isn't a business model either. A business model is where you figure out who will give you money in exchange for value delivered. If you need money, you probably should think about that. And then you'll need to spend some time on execution of that plan. I get that programmers just want to make things and have people use them. I feel that too. But pretending that "open source" is a business model is essentially just denying economic reality. It's the same thing when young artists grumble about having to earn a living somehow when they'd rather just be creating art. People can definitely make a living with open-source software. But it doesn't happen by magic, any more than it does with closed-source software. It takes thought and work. That work is grubby and mundane and a bit banal, but it has to get done.
- anigbrowl 10y agoClosed source is a business model because the customer wants what your software does but can't see how it's achieved, so they pay you money to buy a license instead of just re-implementing it.
- wpietri 10y agoNo. I have a ton of closed-source software in my projects folder. That's not a business model. Neither is open-source software, where I take some of that stuff and throw it up on GitHub. A business model is where I repeatably create value for others and receive money in exchange. A modern software company can do that in a variety of ways, including selling training, documentation, support, custom features, consulting, services, and licensing. Both open- and closed-source companies do that. They have business models. But open source on its own is not a business model, and neither is closed source. And what's definitely not a business model is releasing something as open source and hoping that somebody gives me money. Businesses don't just happen. Somebody has to build them.
- pjmlp 10y agoThe difference with open source, is that I can take you out of business with the code you wrote yourself.
- wpietri 10y agoSure, there are differences, but I'm not sure that's one of them. Can you name some companies where that has happened? I'm pretty sure I can name a lot more where it hasn't.
- pjmlp 10y agoI don't keep track of it. It is however a possibility.
- ccozan 10y agoThe biggest counter-example is RedHat.
- pjmlp 10y agoYou mean CentOS and Unbreakable Enterprise Kernel ?
- eyan 10y ago> Saying 'it's not a business model' is basically equivalent to saying 'I don't have to worry about money.' No, Sir. I think the point flew past you. Saying "it's not a business model" means that you need to worry about how to sustain yourself from the get-go if you want to go where ever pleases you, open or closed source.
- anigbrowl 10y agoObviously, but given the low prospect of getting paid for doing open source work on it will be performed primarily by those who don't need a return on the time invested.