On Sun, 2006-09-10 at 22:56 -0700, Randolph D Garrett wrote: > Thanks. > > The question is more oriented towards the financial side. It's hard to > 'support' in a way (maybe the word is participate?) open software > development IF it is designed as "unprofitable" and therefore doesn't have a > hired work force.
The business models are more complex and a combination of paid people and volunteers. Its not unprofitable in the bigger picture but its not simply a matter f hire a developer create a product and sell licenses for it. > The basic concept of "no one owns the code / design", that is no patent, is > great! No monopoly! No government either. However there is a committee > involved in a way. ;-) The control of paid for positions is still in the hands of a relatively few people. That might make things harder if you are a developer looking for paid work, it makes like easier for the consumer though. > Don't get me wrong, I FULLY support open software as it is a great way to > create software as well as shareware and other methods recently (last 20 > years) developed in creating and dispensing products. I think shareware is an entirely different concept. > However I cannot WORK in open software development as I, and a lot of people > I know, just don't have the free time to do so. Employment (and money) is a > first consideration in life. So get a job in conventional software development. Your first priority is shelter, clothing and food. If you satisfy those needs you are then in a position to choose how you use any personal resources left over. Many people use these to take part in OSS projects. It doesn't mean you have to but if you want to you will be welcome. hat might lead to a paid position as an OSS developer, it might not. Its a risk some people are willing to take but its not right for everyone. > So essentially all the developers are unpaid as there is no "profit center"? No, most developers are paid by large corporates or for consulting or other services. The business model is just more complicated. > Red Hat is such a profit center. Just trying to understand all these open > development concepts from a bean counter perspective. And therefore what's > in it for me... As long as your business does not fundamentally depend on selling software licenses it can be a profit centre and develop open source. However, there has to be some motivation to do it. That might be to promote services associated with Open Source, to reduce costs in a large organisation by ridding it of dependency on a monopoly supplier, to spite a competitor or pure altruism. It exists and is growing so there must be a viable business model behind it. Ian -- www.theINGOTS.org www.schoolforge.org.uk www.opendocumentfellowship.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
