Here, differences between open source and free software are argued again. We come back to this question: is open source “free beer” or “free speech”?
On early stage, free-software advocates were aiming to fight against those proprietary software capitalists. However, this “free” idea didn’t fit the current situation because free software companies were difficult to defeat those “capitalists” due to a lack of commercial ascendancy. So it changed. Some believe open source has lost its soul which is against the “copyright-toting software capitalists”.
In the article “Is open source losing its soul?” the author, Asay, suggests that, in current situation, it is better for open source to keep “some bits proprietary” than “hold to a purist software development philosophy”. He is right. As I wrote on a previous blog, an open source company sometimes needs an adoption to fit new environment in order to grow stronger, including changing strategies. If open source companies follow a "proprietary" way, even it seems being radically changed from the initial approach, to become more competitive against those “proprietary” companies, it can enhance the their own competitive power. This is a necessity in the expansion of open source. As Asay points out, “companies should be putting profitability first. It's the necessity that makes every other necessity possible”. Therefore, most open source companies are now holding a different ideology from free software purists. It means “free speech” but not “free beer” at all.
Moreover, after a successful beginning, open source companies can drive those “proprietary” companies, like Oracle and IBM, contributing codes to open source. If possible, open source can finally win this battle against copyright-toting capitalism. So it is much more convinced that the current form of open source is apart from its initial model, especially not in a charge-free way.
Sources: Is open source losing its soul?
Retrieved from: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13505_3-10253671-16.html
Tuesday, 2 June 2009
Open source: “pay or contribute” model
This article mainly talks about the support of outside development contributions in open source softwares. The case mentioned in this article is the encouragement of these outside development contributions in Jahia, a kind of open-sourced Web Content Integration software. It is called “pay or contribute”.
I agree, as the author Asay says, the most important and difficult part for open source softwares is how to find contributors to provide applications. Because open source softwares, comparing with softwares that has own developers, is hard to survive without anyone using its code and developing applications for it. This problem also can be seen as a weak point for open source-based websites competing with websites who have own producers. Therefore, Jahia provides lots of discount on commercial subscription to stimulate application developers using its platform, producing apps and providing apps.
In China, there is a social networking website, called Xiaonei, which is similar to Facebook performing well. It focused on its users, most are students, and provides a lot of interesting applications to attract these users. At the beginning, it succeeded by using free charging policy for those app providers, regardless of the app’s quality. Then, it built a good reputation in students and increased user groups so that more application providers willing to provide products for it. And now, it costs money. This, in my opinion, is a good strategy for a open source-based softwares or websites.
Like this article mentioned about Jahia, using different marketing strategy and changing traditional operating method may be the solution when open source is growing but facing many troubles.
Article: A look inside Jahia's 'pay or contribute' open-source model.
from: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13505_3-10251115-16.html
I agree, as the author Asay says, the most important and difficult part for open source softwares is how to find contributors to provide applications. Because open source softwares, comparing with softwares that has own developers, is hard to survive without anyone using its code and developing applications for it. This problem also can be seen as a weak point for open source-based websites competing with websites who have own producers. Therefore, Jahia provides lots of discount on commercial subscription to stimulate application developers using its platform, producing apps and providing apps.
In China, there is a social networking website, called Xiaonei, which is similar to Facebook performing well. It focused on its users, most are students, and provides a lot of interesting applications to attract these users. At the beginning, it succeeded by using free charging policy for those app providers, regardless of the app’s quality. Then, it built a good reputation in students and increased user groups so that more application providers willing to provide products for it. And now, it costs money. This, in my opinion, is a good strategy for a open source-based softwares or websites.
Like this article mentioned about Jahia, using different marketing strategy and changing traditional operating method may be the solution when open source is growing but facing many troubles.
Article: A look inside Jahia's 'pay or contribute' open-source model.
from: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13505_3-10251115-16.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)