3 ms·
In tech, sure. But there's also a huge chunk of innovation driven by open source. If Google had standardized on MS Windows instead of Linux, then MS would sti
by bb88 7y ago
In tech, sure. But there's also a huge chunk of innovation driven by open source. If Google had standardized on MS Windows instead of Linux, then MS would still be at the top of the heap.
The barrier for entry to tech is very low for technology, which means that competition is also higher, which then drives more innovation.
With pharma there is a cash outlay required to research and manufacture a drug, even if it's off patent. Software just needs a computer and time.
The problem With this tech vs pharma argument seems to be the comparison of two sectors which aren't apparently the same at all.
- rayiner 7y agoThe fact that Chrome is monetized by plugging into Google's ad network instead of charging users per copy isn't a difference in how Chrome is developed. For the most prominent open source projects, the basic development model is still throwing corporate money at very expensive engineers. That's true for Linux itself--for a long time, the vast majority of contributions have been from corporate sponsors.