Slashdot Mirror
Why is OSS Commercial Software So Expensive?
An anonymous reader asks: "Our startup honestly wanted to use OSS products. We do not want to spend time for any OSS bug fixing so our main requirement was -official support for all OSS products-. We thought were prepared to pay the price for OSS products, but then we got a price sticker shock. Now behold: QT is $3300 per seat. We have dropped the development and rewrote everything to C# (MSVS 2005 is ~$700). Embedded Linux from a reputable RT vendor is $25,000 per 5 seats per year. We needed only 3 seats. We had to buy 5 nevertheless. The support was bad. We will go for VxWorks or WinCE in our next product. Red Hat Linux WS is $299. An OEM version of Windows XP Pro is ~$140. A Cygwin commercial license will cost tens of thousands of dollars and is only available for large shops. We need 5 seats. Windows Unix services are free. After all, we have decided that the survival of our business is more important for us then 'do-good' ideas. Except for that embedded Linux (slated for WinCE or VxWorks substitution), we are not OSS shop anymore." Why are commercial ports of OSS software so expensive, and what would need to happen before they could be competitive in the future?
Someone's gotta pay the bill for all those torrents. Speaking of which, my fedora dl is almost done. Thanks, d00d!
After all, we have decided that the survival of our business is more important for us then 'do-good' ideas.
Survival of your business model depends on customers who want to purchase your services.
OSS is about freedom of choice. All your other points are null and void because there are several OSS alternatives to choose from. To complain that Red Hat charges $299 where SuSE charges $70 (with support) is just plain dis-information.
This Ask Slashdot reads like a Microsoft marketing campaign. OSS doesn't work for us, Microsoft has all the solutions. Hey Taco, how about a rule against anonymous Ask Slashdot submissions (except in the case of whistle blowers and torrid sex tales)?
Enjoy,
It's just the normal noises in here.
"There's this tremendous myth that OSS is all written by good Samaritans in their spare time, and companies that sell it commercially simply rebrand it, box it, and ship it."
Information wants to be free.
"It's like people think that Linux is free, so why can't Redhat distribute it for almost nothing?"
Hey, the argument works for other IP. Why should RH be an exception?
That is quite interesting. I was under the impression that OpenOffice.org was available for Windows.
Not only that but it also comes with databasess (plural),...
Indeed! Very plural, apparently.
Mod parent up.
Enterprise support is availabe, but most of the time a qualified individual can search the KB articles just as fast the the dork on the other end of the phone in Microsoft.
Who is this that even the wind and the waves obey Him? Surely this computer must submit also!
Oh, you must mean the store that sold me the XP Pro OEM version with a PC power cord to qualify it as sold with critical hardware. Right. I'm sure they'll answer my calls when I have problems with XP Pro.
Why are commercial ports of OSS software so expensive [...] ?
well, it's takes a lot of beer to get customers to buy free stuff.
and the KB won't have an unintelligible Hindi accent to its english
If you purchased an OEM kit from a distributor or store, with or without piecemeal parts, you're considered to be your own OEM. Call your landline from your cell, or vise versa :)
Obviously you also recieve loads of tools such as wordprocessors, spreadsheets and countless useful other utilities with Microsoft Windows XP. I think not.