> If you can't monetize you can't put people on your software and it will suck (like most OSS software, for example). I have worked on FLOSS software and I hav

> If you can't monetize you can't put people on your software and it will suck (like most OSS software, for example). I have worked on FLOSS software and I have worked on non-FLOSS software and I don't see most FLOSS software sucking in a way that non-FLOSS does not. FLOSS has some advantages - as there is no compelling need to release new features which can drive up revenue and profit (or at least OKRs) for the next quarter, you don't get a constant need to release unneeded junk to try to squeeze the last dime out of consumers. You can actually spend time refactoring the code, or only releasing when it is properly architected. Most of the servers and smartphones in the world are running on a FLOSS kernel. MacBook's OS derive from CSRG's BSD, and even some of Windows, like the Internet stack, derive from FLOSS. If it sucks so much, why do virtually all major operating systems derive fully, or at least partially, from it?