Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

[News] Fake "Open Source" Increasingly Disrespected

  • Subject: [News] Fake "Open Source" Increasingly Disrespected
  • From: Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2010 07:44:43 +0100
  • Followup-to: comp.os.linux.advocacy
  • Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
  • User-agent: KNode/4.3.1
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Let he who is without proprietary features cast the first stone

,----[ Quote ]
| If the recent debate about open core licensing 
| has proven one thing, it is that the issue of 
| combining proprietary and open source code 
| continues to be a controversial one. 
`----

http://blogs.the451group.com/opensource/2010/04/08/let-he-who-is-without-proprietary-features-cast-the-first-stone/

Upgrading the motivational operating system: A conversation with Daniel Pink

,----[ Quote ]
| And then getting to open source, you have this 
| business model that would have seemed fanciful 
| if not insane 25 years ago, which is built not 
| so much around these carrot-and-stick-
| motivators but around other sorts of drives 
| becoming very popular.
| 
| So I think that more broadly the operating 
| system thatâs used--the kind of societal 
| behavioral operating system that is 
| undergirding open source--is in many ways a 
| model for the upgraded motivational operating 
| system that all organizations need.
`----

http://opensource.com/business/10/4/upgrading-motivational-operating-system-conversation-daniel-pink


Recent:

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


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)

iEYEARECAAYFAkvAHlsACgkQU4xAY3RXLo7tnQCeIwNrrkmlfMN1oc/8C5KNY5oO
YcIAoIM+nRjd64IgA5Utni8HD7qgXWb1
=Loub
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index