Is The Open Source Business Model Broken?
Posted 12/07/08 at 11:07:42 AM by Justin Kerr
Comments
Print
Email
Respected Open Source advocate, and CEO of Collaborative Software Stuart Cohen warns that the business model behind open source software companies is broken. And that the nature of these businesses will need to evolve in order to survive. In his article he explains how the traditional model in which companies would freely offer software, and make a living off the support is coming to an end. An end which is likely to be accelerated by the economic slowdown. He cautions open source designers to view the software as more of a means to an end.
As part of his argument, he claims the real value of open source software companies will come from those who can find ways to add value with supporting add-ons and applications. He uses Red Hat as an example of a company that adds significant value to the Linux kernel, and couldn’t survive on support alone. “Open-Soure code is generally great code, not requiring much support”. According to Cohen the true power of the open source community will be realized through the spirit of collaboration. “While the open-source business model may be broken, the concepts behind open source will continue to bring new value to customers and strong returns to software company stakeholders”.
So do you think the harsh economic climate will hurt or inspire the open source community?
I have no problem with Open
Submitted by Keith E. Whisman on Sun, 12/07/2008 - 7:25pm
I have no problem with Open Source Software being packaged and sold. You just not allowed to lock down opensource software. If I want to change source code that I purchase from you then I have that right.
I remember WalMart used to sell copies of RedHat Linux and the Netscape Navigator web browser was packaged and sold there as well. Sure you could download both for free.
If it's a good program weather it be opensource or closed I would pay for it.
Remember that opensource is not necessarily freeware.
Open Source Community Supported Software
Submitted by zeringue on Sun, 12/07/2008 - 4:08pm
I have found there are good products that are open source derived, unbuntu and firefox. The open source community drive products like Firefox are unable to support and improve their products lines. I just keep remember reading the article from MPC about firefox 2 with its memory leak not being resolved for they are working to release firefox 3. That to sums up the issues regarding open source, its free whats the point in supporting other versions, wait for the next 2.0.5.0.4.0.1.2 beta version to come out.
Binaries?
Submitted by Wareagle on Sun, 12/07/2008 - 3:32pm
I don't think GPL requires you to distribute binaries (.exe files)- only source code. So you could charge people for binaries, while still making the source code freely available. This might work, since Joe sixpack doesn't know how to compile source code, so he might be willing to pay a modest fee for a binary.
Submitted by Keith E. Whisman on Sun, 12/07/2008 - 7:34pm
I think you only have to supply the source code to those that purchase the binaries.
I don't think an Opensource author has to give away the source code to everyone. The author only has to give you the source code with the binaries.
Say I purchase an open source program from you. I get the binaries (the .EVE's) but I am also entitled to the source code. Not everyone is entitled to the source code. Just the people that purchase the software.
Now I have the EXE and the source. I am free to make a few changes to the source code and compile the source and sell the new EXE and modified source code together. This is legitimate and fine.
But if I write an open source program and sell the source and exe to someone I don't have to make the source publicly available. It only has to be available to the user of my software.
That's how I understand the GPL.
Yeah, right...
Submitted by Kromaethius on Sun, 12/07/2008 - 2:35pm
I am not buying this. Businesses will and are looking into the open source facade and realizing a couple of things, first off, the OS and software claims to be free, licenses that is -- and indeed so, least for the most part.
However, the real money comes into the reality by support and services, retraining the employees and adding a dimension of frustration and anxiety to the work force. Paid training and consultation fees, and the certain probability of hardware costs. One might argue what would be the hardware costs, "Linux has all the drivers for everything." Yeah right... Sure buddy, here take another hit from your crack pipe. By the way, these Linux Zealots are one of the main reasons that folks like myself cannot take kids like this seriously.
Right now with the economy, why would I want to take my company financially and my loyal employees both with this open source nonsense?
Not buying it
Submitted by GreenTurtle on Sun, 12/07/2008 - 1:38pm
I'm not buying it either. ( pun fully intended )
I didn't put much stock into
Submitted by I Jedi on Sun, 12/07/2008 - 1:00pm
I didn't put much stock into the idea, either.
Sounds like.....
Submitted by ghot on Sun, 12/07/2008 - 12:38pm
Stuart Cohen would everyone to beleive the Open Source business model is broken. Wonder why he would think that, hmmmm?
Must Read Articles
Feature
Review
Feature
Feature
Feature
Most Popular Articles
This Month's Issue
FEATURE How to Get FREE Programs, Services, Software & MoreFEATURE Digital Photo Printer RoundupHOW TOBuild a 3D CameraFEATUREDIY Arcade PCWHITE PAPERHow TRIM Works
Technology News
Computer Cooling Fans
Computer Cases
PC Game Controllers
PC Games
Computer Hardware
Headphones
MP3 Players
Stream Video
Computer Mouse
Monitors
Motherboards
NAS Storage
Networking
Laptop Computers
DVD Burner
Digital Cameras
Portable Storage
Computer Accessories
Smartphone
Antivirus Software
Sound Cards
Speakers
Computer Systems
Thumb Drives
Video Cameras
Video Card Reviews
Water Cooling
Gadgets
- Keyboards
© 2009 Future US, Inc. All Rights Reserved.