Open_source
Published: 13:20, Thursday 14 July 2011
Notes
What's this? See my article about Notes.
View as plain text file.
opensource:
is commercial software
usual licence:
general public licence (gpl)
bsd
earn:
paid support for your own project
enterprise upgrades: paid addon, subscription editions
commercially packaged knowledge and training
install, customize, enhance for money
makes the os product better for new customers
service instead of licence
people pay for open source hamburgers
printed manuals and cds
relicencing and sell
libraries and engines to integrate in non opensource
you need written permission of all original authors
one can earn from existing open source projects
grants
can be copyrighted
actions
research pros and cons of licencing and businnes models
see people around os projects
see existing projects -> enhance?
talk to community
package
marketing the fact that it is os
perpetual code escrow
should know the code best
changes are difficult
manage community contributions
community needs vs making money balance
no open source businnes model:
jverberg.posterous.com/open-source-businnes-model
"A open source software businnes model simply doesn't exist, by definition. You can't charge for the software. [...] I think your businnes model should be around something else than the software. Let it go, you are not selling software anymore."
"The question you should be asking is 'How can a company make money, if it gives away software for free?'"
strategies:
optimization
dual licensse
consulting
subscription
patronage: drive the standards
host
embed
you don't support open source, open source supports you
alternative:
open source doesn't threaten custom-built software
custom-built software 95%
software cost is 0
"who wll invest in software development if it doesn't yeld a return?"
open source is no dumping
only who doesn't rely on the software can give it away for free
create additional copies of a software costs nothing
laws impose a system of artificial scarcity: inefficient
if making the software doesn't cost you anything, then it does not have to have a return
follows
make open source software only because it makes sense for it to exist
it is not a businnes model
it is just a way of getting what you need
therefore any open source software (whether existing or developed with a community) shall be just a mean
"software stands alone in its twin characteristics of infinite replicability and amortisability of effort"
"Looked at this way, open source seems the more natural and efficient way to build software"
"perhaps corporations shouldn't develop software at all!"
"open source software is a substitute, not a competitor, to the entire category of proprietary commercial software."
"Is it possible to make money off open source? In the light of all that we have discussed, this now seems a rather petty and inconsequential question to ask. There is great wealth that will be created through Open Source in the coming months and years, and very little of that will have anything to do with money."
what I can offer
knowledge, intelligence, competence, time
so the ability to make software is worth nothing?
the time spent developing?
production: work -> existence, availability to everyone
who would pay for the production of software that everyone can have then?
who would pay for the "existence" of software rather than for its ownership?
maybe someone wants a software to exist, because if it exists, they profit?
the disadvantage of other people having vs the advantage of having it: where is the first smaller than the second?
many small payments
mix tra kickstarter e guru.com
chiunque può proporre progetti
dei gruppi di developer si propongono
i partecipanti di un gruppo possono votare per il prezzo
chiunque può donare soldi a uno o a un altro gruppo+progetto
il prezzo giusto:
quanto ci vuole per chi lo produce a vivere il tempo necessario per la produzione
nel caso del software: molto la prima volta, più nulla dopo
Write a Comment
* These fields are mandatory.