You're viewing a single thread.
-
redirect a bit more of it to the devs and you get a bigger and better ecosystem.
make it free for non-commercial use. this works even as a business model of sorts.
-
Okay, I would love that but let me see if I can play devils advocate and get productive responses that work in the capitalistic world we are stuck in.
Why would a company pay a team millions of dollars annually to give it away for free. That destines their entire company for failure in their mind. They get no kick backs other than a thank you note for doing so... Which means nothing to their bottom line but down.
-
i think you misunderstood it.
take a look at libreoffice, proxmox, pfsense, flexiwan, canonical, redhat if you want an example of this business model actually working, at different stages of success.
-
-
It's no longer open source if you restrict commercial usage. Sure, licence your software that way if you want to, but don't call it open source.
-
is ubuntu not open source then? or libreoffice?
if so, sure.
-
Ubuntu and LibreOffice are both free for commercial use. Or am I misunderstanding what you mean?
-
canonical and libreoffice are examples of companies that do commercial support contracts. proxmox is an example of a free for personal use, but paid for businesses.
im talking about licensing and business models, by giving a few examples of how devs can be paid while being free and open for users, but paid somehow for companies. and how that doesnt necessarily mean it has to be closed.
-
-
-
-