Slashdot Mirror
Open Source Economics and Why IBM Is Winning
driehle writes "In an article published in IEEE Computer magazine I recently looked at the economics of open source. I argue that large system integrators will do best and that open source startups will keep struggling. For developers, open source creates independence and new career paths as committers, while non-committers will fall on hard times. The race is on!"
oh? Was it Lint he worked on then? I'm confused, I always thought it was him who worked on Splint
Collaborate with competitors in the same field for the common product they all need, then compete in pursuit of their market.
Why would any company willingly give up any competitive advantage? That's business suicide.
Why would I, as a business owner, give my good, custom, closed software away to competitors that don't have anything like it, just in the hopes that my software will be marginally improved? In the meantime, assuming that my competition CAN improve my software, I'm giving my competition a huge advantage they didn't previously have. It's a LOT of risk, with minimal reward, for people who already have a software advantage.
I don't respond to AC's.
"The vast majority of both the Linux kernel and the userspace applications have been paid for by commercial companies"
So are we taking the position today that Linux development includes userspace applications and thus Linux's security and stability includes all of those applications, or are we taking the position that Linux is just a kernel and some GNU libraries? The story around here changes so much, it's hard to keep track.