-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
âOpen Coreâ Is the New Shareware
,----[ Quote ]
| Like most buzzwords, Open Core has no real agreed-upon
| meaning. I'm using it to describe a business model
| whereby some middleware-ish system is released by a
| single, for-profit entity copyright holder, who
| requires copyright-assigned changes back to the
| company, and that company sells proprietary add-ons
| and applications that use the framework. Often, the
| model further uses the GPL to forbid anyone but the
| copyright-holding company to make such proprietary
| add-on applications (i.e., everyone else would have to
| GPL their applications). In the current debate, some
| have proposed that a permissive license structure can
| be used for the core instead.
`----
http://www.ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2009/10/16/open-core-shareware.html
When to give up control of an open source core
http://www.infoworld.com/d/open-source/when-give-control-open-source-core-302
Recent:
Open Core: The worst of both worlds
,----[ Quote ]
| In the end open core software is driven
| by the same incentives as proprietary
| software is. Therefore it suffers from
| the same problems: too much focus on
| features and too little on quality.
| Thatâs the downside of proprietary
| software. But it also inherits the
| problems of open source software. Because
| of the open source community editions you
| have to worry about forks taking your
| customers (e.g. vtiger). To top it off
| they also need to compete against their
| own developer community who will
| reimplement the closed enterprise
| features as add-ons for the open source
| edition. This magnifies the problems
| caused by the feature treadmill and leads
| to a rapid decline in quality.
`----
http://www.jejik.com/articles/2009/10/open_core_the_worst_of_both_worlds/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAkraQSkACgkQU4xAY3RXLo6gOACgi3YmZuXZTaNroX6XpXh2gFCc
HnsAn3s3Lu4eLglj0GD/ZaQTbBtXCUAi
=eMSn
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
|
