4 ms·

I don't know -- photosynthesing organisms that generate primary resources? Which resources are then indirectly consumed by OSS (at least its "free as in beer"

by Radim 10y ago

I don't know -- photosynthesing organisms that generate primary resources? Which resources are then indirectly consumed by OSS (at least its "free as in beer" variant), acting as a parasite in your analogy :) The money has to ultimately come from somewhere, you know, or the music stops. What would software devs do if all the oh-so-evil proprietary software disappeared? Exchange FOSS PRs with each other, until they die of hunger?

visarga 10y ago
They would make money by using open source tools to implement specific projects for companies and end users. The fact that Node and Mongo exist is of no use, if you don't know how they work together. It takes work and experience to use the open source tools at their fullest.
- Radim 10y ago
  Make money from "specific projects" that are free open source software? O_o I think you missed the part where a vital piece of the ecosystem, namely proprietary/non-free software, no longer exists.
justinclift 10y ago
> I don't know -- photosynthesing organisms that generate primary resources? Not sure. On one hand, the walled garden approach does seem to have some benefits when done well, of drawing in further resources/development. > Indirectly consumed by OSS Yeah, that could definitely be the case sometimes too. When OSS Communities use offerings present in these walled gardens (eg Affinity Designer, a good vector graphics app for OSX) to further what they're doing. Not sure if parasite is correct :), but it seems reasonable there's some interplay between the produce of the walled garden(s) and the external ecosystem. From the OSS Communities perspective, I'd kind of expect (but am not really sure) that many of the resources used in the walled garden apps come from OSS. eg things like gzip, various other libraries, perhaps graphics (etc). And as a note, I don't personally believe all proprietary software is oh-so-evil. ;) The companies which develop software choose to act however they do, evil or not. The "evil" is in the actions of the companies, regardless of the OSS-or-not nature. That's just my understanding of things thus far anyway. :D

by Radim 10y ago

visarga 10y ago

They would make money by using open source tools to implement specific projects for companies and end users. The fact that Node and Mongo exist is of no use, if you don't know how they work together. It takes work and experience to use the open source tools at their fullest.

Radim 10y ago
Make money from "specific projects" that are free open source software? O_o I think you missed the part where a vital piece of the ecosystem, namely proprietary/non-free software, no longer exists.

justinclift 10y ago

> I don't know -- photosynthesing organisms that generate primary resources? Not sure. On one hand, the walled garden approach does seem to have some benefits when done well, of drawing in further resources/development. > Indirectly consumed by OSS Yeah, that could definitely be the case sometimes too. When OSS Communities use offerings present in these walled gardens (eg Affinity Designer, a good vector graphics app for OSX) to further what they're doing. Not sure if parasite is correct :), but it seems reasonable there's some interplay between the produce of the walled garden(s) and the external ecosystem. From the OSS Communities perspective, I'd kind of expect (but am not really sure) that many of the resources used in the walled garden apps come from OSS. eg things like gzip, various other libraries, perhaps graphics (etc). And as a note, I don't personally believe all proprietary software is oh-so-evil. ;) The companies which develop software choose to act however they do, evil or not. The "evil" is in the actions of the companies, regardless of the OSS-or-not nature. That's just my understanding of things thus far anyway. :D