Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Top Ten Open Source Innovators

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the leading-the-pack dept.

42istheanswer writes "Open source is so much more than Linux these days. A lot is happening beyond the popular operating system. Open source models are thriving in CRM (SugarCRM), messaging (Scalix), and systems management (Zenoss). Datamation has identified ten leading commercial open-source innovators and the projects they are working on in their article, Ten Leading Open Source Innovators."

3 of 152 comments (clear)

  1. Venture Funding == Innovation (?!?) by Wugger · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What do all these stories of open source "innovation" have in common? They all include prominent mention of how much venture money the companies have raised. I can only assume this publication is Straight Out of Silicon Valley (tm).

  2. Not one of them has come close to RMS. by anwyn · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Not one of these organization has made 1/10th the contribution of RMS.
    • RMS created gcc. Without gcc there would be no LINUX or BSD. Most of the utilities in the article would be impossible without gcc. Who was the original author of gcc? RMS.
    • RMS created most of the GNU utilities without which most of GNU lINUX and BSD would be worthless.
    • RMS was the first to proclaim the need for a free OS platform. He was the first to try to make such a platform a practical reality. (GNU).
    • RMS created the GPL.
    There is no one who has made contributions to the Free software and/or "open source" software communities equal to that of RMS.

    This includes LINUS.

    I realize that RMS can be idealogical, stubborn and hard to deal with, but the fact remains that in spite of this, or perhaps because of it, no one has made as great a contribution.

  3. Re:Open Source != Free Software by AlXtreme · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I'm afraid you are misinformed, and those that moderated you up are misinformed too. SugarCRM certainly doesn't conform to the OSI definition (redistribution of modified versions), and therefore isn't "open source software".


    It is a wide misconception that open source != free software. In a sense, they are two movements that both emphasize different sides of the same coin. There is a problem with the term "open source" being used as a marketing tool for products not adhering to the proper definition, but the same could apply for the term "free software".

    --
    This sig is intentionally left blank