3 ms·
How would it be different if whole of MongoDB had a proprietary license? Amazon would do the same thing with the same effect. Open Source is a red herring here
by zby 8y ago
How would it be different if whole of MongoDB had a proprietary license? Amazon would do the same thing with the same effect.
Open Source is a red herring here - the problem is with selling software when AWS sells “performance, scalability, and availability.”
- manigandham 8y agoIt's unlikely that the product would have as much usage in the first place to get any attention, nor would the protocol be open-source for AWS to host or build its own version. That's a critical difference compared to proprietary software, in which case AWS would be a customer and the vendor would be just fine.
- zby 8y agoWhy would AWS be a customer if Mongo was entirely proprietary and not when it is mostly Open Source?
- manigandham 8y agoBecause open-source is free, that's the big difference. Why would they pay for something they don't have to? There's barely anything in the enterprise edition that's worth paying for, especially when most of it is operations tools that AWS doesn't need.
- zby 8y agoIf it was proprietary it would not be free - why should they pay then and not now? I am arguing that they would not, just like they don't now - there is no difference. The problem is with selling software - not with Open Source, if it was entirely Open Source - then they would not have to pay and they would use it.
- manigandham 8y agoWhat? If it's proprietary or closed source then the clouds have pay for to legally offer it to their customers. They can't just steal it without paying. This is extremely common. How do you think Windows, SQL Server, Oracle, Redhat Linux, Spark Enterprise, Cloudera/Hortonworks, and lots of other products are offered by the clouds? If there's enough demand for proprietary software then the clouds will do a licensing deal directly with the vendor, however MongoDB gave away too much of the product as open-source so there's no reason to pay them. That's the problem. The other issue is that if it was never open-source then nobody might even be using it in the first place, so it's a hard balance.
- zby 8y agoIf it is proprietary they don't have to pay - they can always write their own - just like it happend in this case. If it is economic to write their own now - it would also be economic to write their own when Mongo was entirely proprietary. There is no economic difference in these two situations. But maybe you believe that it was not economy that dictated the rewrite - but rather it was a kind of tantrum - "others can have it for free why can't we!!!???". I don't think it was an emotional decision.
- manigandham 8y agoIf that was feasible then they would already have SQL Server and Oracle APIs offered using their own tech instead of buying other vendors. Aurora MySQL and PostgreSQL still uses the open-source code layer on the top and just switches out the storage engines, and it's most likely the same here by using parts of actual MongoDB with a different storage engine.
- zby 8y agoIsn't the MongoDB code covered by their Server Side license [1]? AWS could not use this legally. 1. https://www.mongodb.com/blog/post/mongodb-now-released-under-the-server-side-public-license https://www.mongodb.com/blog/post/mongodb-now-released-under...