.Can there be a good business model for open source guys?
I have been thinking about business models for open source softwares. Though I couldn’t come up with proper answer. Lets see, let me try to start with different software people make and use.
Office : No doubt it needs very big amount of work. And if someone puts this much effort to make an Office package, why will he give it away for free? Of course not, it doesn’t make sense. Probably thats the reason why we do not have any open-source Office software. And surely Microsoft Office is way too good. OOo is dumped for long time now.
Matlab, Visual Studio etc : Again it requires big amount of investment and hard work. No reason one should give it away for free. Though yeah Eclipse is there. And I must say that it is very good. But isn’t it a way in which IBM is earning publicity? And isn’t it same with netbeans as well.
Computer Games : Again too much work and proficiency.
Operating System : Again, do you think open source can help make an Operating System any better? Oh yeah, bug fixing.. probably yes, but without incentive why will someone do quality work? Every second day one thing or another is broken. But yeah surely, like Redhat is doing, good things are possible with it, specially for server side technologies.
Other Desktop Applications : Amarok, they are fighting to get funds… Is there any good voice chat client? Ekiga? does support proxy. Skype? no more an open source project. Gaim? not yet. Now don’t say that they are fighting in reverse engineering and other bullshit. Firefox? don’t you know that people start with Firefox but do not stick to it for long time. Thats a popular observation, isn’t it. Evolution? I wish they come up with something good. Though I guess they are also having problems (because of open source nature? I guess yes.)
I am not saying that open source is right or wrong. But at the end of the day, what a user wants is good software, softwares in which he need not be a geek to solve the problem. And surely as of now, I do not see open source work to give any good reply to this need. You may say that Gutsy is a solution, or fedora 8 is awesome, and these distros solves most of the problems. But don’t you think you have been giving these arguments for last 20 years? When fedora 5 came, everyone said the same. When fedora 6 came same. And same goes with Ubuntu.
Oh come on Rohit, you can do better than that.
Publishing software: Nearly every organization relies heavily on desktop publishing software (office suites). If something does not work correctly, they will want to call up the organization that makes it and have them show them what they are doing wrong, or fix it. There are a variety of specific business models that can stem from this. There is just the generic support model, which involves paying a regular fee. There is the bounty-hacker support model, where there is no regular fee, but a bounty placed on every problem. There is also the inside man model, where instead of the software organization paying the developers bills, the interested party using the software hires a specific developer to fix their problems for them (For example, Magnatune is the employer of one of the Rhythmbox developers).
IDEs/Programming Languages: Exact same thing. Very rich parties rely heavily on this genre of software. They will put money into making sure it works properly.
Games: This is where you run into a problem because you no longer have rich clients. However, especially with a networked game where people have to pay user fees, the people running the game will probably want support to make sure every hack gets fixed as soon as it is created. For a non-networked game, you will not see nearly as much generated money, but hopefully you can make up for this with a few parties interested in getting bugs fixed and crowd-sourcing.
Operating Systems: Support again.
Other apps: Same thing.
Open source software is not *that* great because you, the user gets to mess with the source. It is great because someone can, and when one party’s problem gets fixed, everyone’s problem gets fixed. Open source software is not lacking in successful business models, but companies who have been using the supply and demand model for years are too cautious and wimpy to try out something new, even if it might be far better.
If you are having trouble coming up with good open source business models, see what others have to say. Do a search on this and you will find a wealth of information.
Comment by Conley — December 3, 2007 @ 9:38 am
publishing software : Do you think lot of companies need support for publishing software. I do not find any need of any support when using Office. and anyways MS doesn’t give support for that.
IDEs : agree
Games : I don’t think big net games can get enough money.
Operating System : for servers may be, but for normal desktop clients, do you think people ask for support? I do not think so. Big business are working without any support for desktop OS.
Comment by rohitj — December 13, 2007 @ 2:58 pm
rohit you are very right. Finally you are right on the path to understand this world. No big company actually likes open source. Its only that they want to dethrone MS that they are forced to use it. Even IBM loses lots of its royalty money from MS if open source gets too much of win. So do Dell and HP. They all just want to benefit open source only to the extent that it does not harm them. Open Source has no benefits. Why should every CSE guy burn his ass, just to give his source to some idiots. He does have a right to make a living. Also, the open source people also want to make money, so they devise new methods, they will sell stickers for exorbitantly large sums(Remember your NG post). Let me challenge everyone ought here, who will give away the source of MS-office if he somehow happens to get it by magic. NO one Plainly and simply no one. The open source guys are a bunch of hypocrites, because the first word they heard was Anti-Microsoft. The fact is that Red-hat is also cheating on everyone. If you are so insistent on easy computing for everyone, why provide assitance for a fee, why not free. The know linux is so complex that everyone will need to pay and thus they will be reach. What the fuck. If you really want to help people, just put your hand in the pocket, and buy and MS product because that money will actually go to poor people of Africa
Long live Microsoft, Open Source people are hypocrites
Comment by youmakeyou — December 16, 2007 @ 10:33 am
hahaha!! I do not know why you didn’t mention your name ( its clear that you are in IITK). Seems like you are afraid that I will pick you personally and will prove that you are wrong.
rohit you are very right.
>> Thank you.
Finally you are right on the path to understand this world.
>> Not sure of it.
No big company actually likes open source.
>> Very wrong!
Its only that they want to dethrone MS that they are forced to use it. Even IBM loses lots of its royalty money from MS if open source gets too much of win.
>> To some extent you may be right.
So do Dell and HP.
>> You surely have lack of knowledge. What fight do they have with MS? MS gives them Windows to sell with computer for free.
They all just want to benefit open source only to the extent that it does not harm them. Open Source has no benefits.
>> Wrong!! People are learning through open source. Its just that we need to come up with better and robust business plans. QT for example has a cool business plan. learn about it.
Why should every CSE guy burn his ass, just to give his source to some idiots. He does have a right to make a living.
>> Yes, they want money. And for that matter they will earn it from open source projects as well. And mind it, they are not giving the code to idiots. They are giving it to the bunch of awesome people, who can use it in better way to make the overall software world better.
Also, the open source people also want to make money, so they devise new methods, they will sell stickers for exorbitantly large sums(Remember your NG post).
>> Let me clarify my post. I asked for people who are interested in such stickers. It was a no-profit thing. And open source has nothing to do with it. It was just that we wanted Linux stickers on my laptop rather than windows. And since it can be printed in bulk, we needed people. And if you remember finally we ended up spending money from our pockets, so that we could distribute stickers for free.
Let me challenge everyone ought here, who will give away the source of MS-office if he somehow happens to get it by magic. NO one Plainly and simply no one.
>> Yes, MS is a mean company, and will not offer its Office code.
The open source guys are a bunch of hypocrites, because the first word they heard was Anti-Microsoft.
>> haha, they are the best developers in this world. And they chose this way because they have principles, and because they want that overall creativity of this worlds should increase.
The fact is that Red-hat is also cheating on everyone. If you are so insistent on easy computing for everyone, why provide assitance for a fee, why not free.
>> Noone in market is there for nothing. They want money, and here they want money for custom service people want.
The know linux is so complex that everyone will need to pay and thus they will be reach. What the fuck.
>> Are you trying to say that the big different industry who are using redhat and for that matter any linux server are stupid. The fact is that they know that linux is more stable and secure. And believe me MS knows that.
If you really want to help people, just put your hand in the pocket, and buy and MS product because that money will actually go to poor people of Africa.
>> Really funny!!
Long live Microsoft, Open Source people are hypocrites
>> Fuck off!!!!!
First of all, open source people are not hypocrites. Of course
everyone out there in market wants to earn money, but there is this term called “ethics”. Even robbers earn money, but they are wrong because the way they earn money is wrong. In the similar track, the way today different businesses are working, whether it is MS in computer industry or it is Disney in animation industry, are not behaving ethically. The fight is against the fact that they are blocking creativity.
Through my post, i wanted to emphasize on small copyright period rather than anti-open source stuff. I am still not happy with MS business model.
Comment by rohitj — December 16, 2007 @ 11:10 am
MR. Rohit jain, unfortunately, even if you are a fourth yearite and boast too much of your knowledge, you don’t know that MS doesn’t give windows for free to hp and dell, they are priced for the OEM version. Got it
haven’t you ??
And as far as best developers are concerned, they are already hired by MS and google.
Also you probably don’t know that 67% new servers are sold with windows. google this and you will find a recent news about this
I dont fear you that you will ‘catch me’
Comment by fake rohit jain — January 13, 2008 @ 11:06 am
I do not know what “fourth year” has to do with this. But yeah about the “boast” thing, I must thank you for that. seems like I am at least able to boast about my brain, otherwise I used to think that I am still new to this world.
by “free” to dell and hp, I meant that its equivalent to free. You probably needed to have positive attitude there.
Lemme tell ya, best developers are not sitting in CSE IITK. If I consider IITK itself, most of the best developers are not in CSE, and some probably wouldnt even have minimum CPI required. People with CPI 10, are not developers.
People are more used to windows environment, which surely makes people buy windows server. I do not know what that means. 67 is surely much less than their market share in desktop computing.
Comment by rohitj — January 13, 2008 @ 11:42 am