3 ms·
I don't think so - many of these applications would never have reached the size and popularity they did as closed source or source available. We'll probably see
by Macha 3y ago
I don't think so - many of these applications would never have reached the size and popularity they did as closed source or source available. We'll probably see more "open source for the growth, slam shut to monetise easier", but I think each one that does so will reduce trust in all such software, so I'd expect ultimately it will lead to companies either picking "definitely proprietary but with known terms" or "full on open source, controlled by a foundation" and avoiding this company=project middle ground.
- josephcsible 3y agoYou don't need it to be controlled by a foundation to prevent this kind of bait and switch. You just need a copyleft license and willingness to accept external contributions without a CLA.
- hnbad 3y agoGood luck getting VC money that way though.
- evanelias 3y agoMany of them also raised tens of millions (or more) in VC funding, which helped them achieve their size and popularity. In a post-ZIRP world, many public tech company valuations have been slashed, and tech IPOs have slowed. Not-yet-profitable private tech companies can struggle to raise funding rounds now at favorable valuations, compared to their last funding round. If you're a VC-funded open source company with no deep moat, this is not a good time. I agree with the GP, we'll likely see more new companies choosing non-open-source but still source-available (e.g. BSL or SSPL) from the start.