This is my biggest problem with the Open Source model. Years ago in college
and in my early career I was continually taught to strive towards programs
and systems that were easy and intuitive so that support was not needed. In
fact if you look at the traditional business model support is something you
alway try to avoid, since you never really make a profit (even if you make a
profit in $ you may lose in customer loyalty). One of the reasons Microsoft
has MVP’s is to reduce their support costs.
Now we have the Open Source business plan where you make your money on
support. Given this why should anyone strive to make high quality, easy to
use software. If your company does this then you get no money.
It is interesting to note that the examples of Open Source companies that
make money such as Red Hat and the GNU Ada people (can’t remember the firms
name) play some games with the open source model. Red Hat has some advanced
configuration and install utilities that are not open source, also their
exact kernel integration while open is not immediately available (unless you
pay), you have to wait for a good while to get it. The GNU Ada folks ship a
“beta” to paying customers for a year then release the source as open, if
you want bug fixes or the newest features you pay (which most goverment
contractors do, and send the bill to US gov).
Don Burn (MVP, Windows DDK)
Windows 2k/XP/2k3 Filesystem and Driver Consulting
----- Original Message -----
From: “Ray Trent”
Newsgroups: ntdev
To: “Windows System Software Developers Interest List”
Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2003 11:10 AM
Subject: [ntdev] Re: value of open-source in the driver community (was “how
to execute a process…”)
> This is an interesting quote, indeed.
>
> Of course there’s a corralary: if they have no money, you lose nothing
> by giving them your software for free :-). Also, if people actually
> want to spend money on a product (in order to get service or support
> or liability or whatever), they’ll buy it from you even if it’s free.
>
> Microsoft has made a bundle (if you’ll pardon the expression 
with
> this technique. Sell a basic platform and give away the goodies. You
> can do the opposite as well. They may (and in fact, have to) bitterly
> complain about people pirating Windows, but they’d be even less happy
> with the alternative.
>