Slashdot Mirror
Why No Billion-Dollar Open Source Companies?
Glyn Moody writes "If open source is such a success, why aren't there any billion-dollar turnover open source companies? A recent briefing by Red Hat's CEO, Jim Whitehurst, to a group of journalists may provide an answer. Asked why Red Hat wasn't yet a $5 billion company, as he suggested it would be one day, he said getting Red Hat to $5 billion meant 'replacing $50 billion of revenue' currently enjoyed by traditional computer companies. If, as is likely, that's generally true for open source companies, it means they will need to displace around $10 billion of proprietary business in order to achieve a billion-dollar turnover. Few are likely to do that. Perhaps it's time for managers of open source startups to stop chasing the billion-dollar dream. If they don't, they will set unrealistic ambitions for themselves, disappoint their investors, and allow opponents of free software to paint one of its defining successes — saving money — as a failure."
PS I forgot to mention. The possessive "its" does not have an apostrophe.
Currently hooked on AMP
Ah a faux news watcher. Where did the OP say "...extra profit is evil..."? "Under socialism..." wow. how did you get to this point?
meme:
I don't think that word means what you think it means.
If the only way you can accept an assertion is by faith, then you are conceding that it can't be taken on its own merits
Well, at least that's what the socialistic activists and leaders of socialistic governments want you to believe. In reality the outcome is much different. You end up with a serf class and ruling class, and never the twain shall meet on any economic level.
"while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude." de Tocqueville
Actually, it's capitalism that takes people's money away, and hands it over to the owners of the means of production. Like most right-wingers, you have no idea what socialism actually is.