...because this is like the only viable business model in open source. And this model does here the same thing it does anywhere else: it makes it so that develo

...because this is like the only viable business model in open source. And this model does here the same thing it does anywhere else: it makes it so that developers are undervalued and underpaid or paid nothing at all. Don't get me wrong, I support open source and I believe most "infrastructure software", like OSs, compilers etc. should be open source. But I'm kind of split since the best viable option when it comes to OSs is still some flavor or *nix/BSD (after 40 freakin years and tons of cool ideas, nothing else turned into a "usable product"!) and nothing better and usable seems to come from the open source community. Microsoft had some very cool ideas in their research department (see Singularity OS for example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singularity_(operating_system) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singularity_(operating_system)), and I'm afraid lots of them will go to the trashcan if Microsoft stops seeing software as a "product". If I weren't talking about Microsoft, we could at least hope they would open source the cool new research projects they loose interest in but I don't have high hopes for this, or for the open source community's ability to innovate and do really new and cool stuff.