2 ms·
What the company does is irrelevant in that example - it might as well have been IKEA publishing React and it would still stand. Now compare your “give us mone
by ricardobeat 3y ago
What the company does is irrelevant in that example - it might as well have been IKEA publishing React and it would still stand.
Now compare your “give us money” model, or open-core, to UNIX, Linux, Firefox, and the others mentioned.
- martypitt 3y agoI'm happy for those companies that become commercially viable through pure open source - and those are some great examples - although they're not financially viable on their own: - Firefox's primary income stream is embedding Google search. - Linux is funded primarily through companies like Canonical and RedHat, which charge for premium features. I'm sceptical that if either of those examples were to launch today, that they'd survive using the same strategies they used years ago. I'd wager that if Canonical launched today, it'd be as Open Core, which isn't far off what it's actual business model is. However, those are great examples of companies whose primary focus is in shipping "The Thing", and finding a way to build a business around it. That's far better than making "The Thing" a side-hustle, which is what the React example was advocating.