Jordan, Thanks for the post.
A significant portion of the software you interact with everyday is open source (the underpinnings of OS X for 1 example, most websites are served by an open source web server as another, WordPress as a 3rd). You are correct - the best software is built & maintained by a small, coordinated team. Where you are incorrect - is that open source can monetary incentive - it doesn't have to. Most open source licenses do not restrict commercial sale. They encourage freedom. Freedom to recover an abandon project. Freedom to make the software work for you in ways the original creators didn't want to. Freedom to make the software work for more people. How you're compensated for that effort - well, that's a separate question. For the few years, I've make a very comfortable living implementing & customizing open source software for my clients. Many very large organizations do the same (Red Hat, Ubuntu, IBM all come to mind). For Quicksilver to continue - we need a small, coordinated team of people like yourself to make Quicksilver your baby. Just as you said. ----------------------- Garrick Van Buren 612 325 9110 ----------------------- Pre-order the eBook http://garrickvanburen.com Kernest.com Free, subscription, and web native fonts. ----------------------- On Jan 9, 2011, at 11:42 PM, Jordan Kay wrote: > I admittedly know very little about the open source movement; but what > I do know is that Quicksilver a) would never have been started as an > open source project, and b) only experienced real growth and > innovation under the fingers of single developer who called it his > own. The difference in development rate is astounding and, to some, > surprising, but tho old adage "too many cooks spoil the broth" has > never been truer. > > My question is as follows: once a product becomes open source, is that > usually it? Have there ever been cases in which a once open-source > product became proprietary again? Unfortunately I feel like that's > Quicksilver's only chance of survival at this point. The value have > having an emotional connection of code that you literally own is > really quite invaluable. Not too optimistic, but I figured I'd ask.
