4 ms·

Ok, quick summary: I think the bottom line of this chat is that making money with open source software is hard. Either: - you are facebook or google and don't

Ok, quick summary: I think the bottom line of this chat is that making money with open source software is hard. Either: - you are facebook or google and don't care about the direct revenue from the software, but its indirect revenue. In this case, you clearly need to be a giant to get these types of strategic leverage advantages - you make money from "support" which is not scalable as a software business - you build something that is yours only and which you can monetize. The idea that they had to push MySQL's advanced features for free because "we must show we are committed to OSS" was strange. I think they could have (from my armchair point of view) given away some basic version and then a for-pay set of capabilities (I don't know: clustering, security, performance, etc). I think the comment that they were valued at $1B and "nobody wants to buy Postgress") was odd. But on the other hand MySQL did have the convergence of good marketing, good technology, good sales, good leaders, etc. What is there for a small entity trying to make money in OSS? Assuming you don't want to be in a support business, then it is some form of "closed software." One important insight was how branding can be an advantage. This is, "this can be open source, but you cannot use my brand." For example Red Hat. Again, also relevant only when you achieve a certain size.

wslh 12y ago
I think a dual business model with an AGPL open source license is a good way to start in the server space. Frankly, I don't know if this will be more difficult than starting a closed source software company becase nowadays closed source software are difficult to promote (e.g. few people share them in social media). Additionally, while I agree that following an open source business model is hard I don't think Facebook and Google apply. They are not open sourcing their core products like MySQL, MongoDB, JBoss, RedHat We can argue about Android but Android is neither iOS nor Windows Mobile, in the sense that the kernel is Linux and there are libs based on the GNU ones.
- hyperliner 12y ago
  I should have clarified. The examples were Facebook open sourcing Cassandra or Google open sourcing Android. So really the examples were Cassandra and Android. I don't agree that closed sourced software are difficult to promote or as you say "few people share them." When people share something on Twitter or Facebook, do they ask "is this open source? then I will share" or do they say simply say "this is an awesome piece of software. let me share it"?
  - wslh 12y ago
    In contexts such as computer security and reverse engineering an open source approach gives more shares within its own community. I understand other people only care if their needs are satisfied.

wslh 12y ago

I think a dual business model with an AGPL open source license is a good way to start in the server space. Frankly, I don't know if this will be more difficult than starting a closed source software company becase nowadays closed source software are difficult to promote (e.g. few people share them in social media). Additionally, while I agree that following an open source business model is hard I don't think Facebook and Google apply. They are not open sourcing their core products like MySQL, MongoDB, JBoss, RedHat We can argue about Android but Android is neither iOS nor Windows Mobile, in the sense that the kernel is Linux and there are libs based on the GNU ones.

hyperliner 12y ago
I should have clarified. The examples were Facebook open sourcing Cassandra or Google open sourcing Android. So really the examples were Cassandra and Android. I don't agree that closed sourced software are difficult to promote or as you say "few people share them." When people share something on Twitter or Facebook, do they ask "is this open source? then I will share" or do they say simply say "this is an awesome piece of software. let me share it"?
- wslh 12y ago
  In contexts such as computer security and reverse engineering an open source approach gives more shares within its own community. I understand other people only care if their needs are satisfied.