Ragi, I enjoyed the video and it gives a "simple" answer about software. presenting Software and Services as the 2 pieces to the revenue pie, with FOSS giving away the software and getting revenue on the services and traditional software model vendors selling the software and giving away the bundled services.
In reality the traditional vendors make more $ on the "software-related service revenue" then the software. I looked up SAP and the service revenue looks like it is 2X the software. Not sure which bucket they put the yearly maintenance fees. So IMHO the FOSS vendors (of which I am one) forgo the software sales and yearly maintenance revenue of the traditional software vendors and make their $$ on the service revenue including programming, modifications, etc. Another big (really big) difference is the source code availability. Thanks Ann Richmond Ragi Burhum wrote: > Paul, > > First of all, I have never met you in person, but I have seen the type > of questions that you have posted on the forum since day one and I can > honestly tell you that it is quite clear that there has been a very > positive progression in your understanding of Linux and Open Source. > Whereas in day one I would have called you a n00b in l33t speak, now I > would not dare to do that :) > Don't get discouraged by the community as a whole. Yes, we can all say > jack-assy things quite often - I know I can. But I would hope that you > have been here long enough to realize that everyone on this list means > well - and whether you like it or not, you are a member of this > community haha > > However, I think Mark was very correct to point out that *Linux* is > not a business. I would hope that everyone in here would agree with > that. Now, there are plenty of business models around Open Source and > thus there are many commercial Open Source solutions, but that is not > the same to say that the projects themselves are a business. Are there > companies around Open Source projects like Linux? Yes. Mark pointed > out a few. > > I believe there is a huge distinction. > > However, that doesn't mean that quality of the software should not be > treated seriously - and I think you were alluring to this. I agree > with that sentiment. > > A friend of mine gave what I considered an *amazing must see* intro > presentation about Open Source and how people make money doing it. I > wanted to share this with you and the group so you would get a better > grasp of a few of the many successful business models around Open > Source. The talk is called "Beyond nerds bearing gifts" > > http://blip.tv/fosslc/beyond-nerds-bearing-gifts-the-future-of-the-open-source-economy-3786361 > > I hope you and everybody else enjoys it. > > - Ragi > > > > Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 16:32:17 -0700 > From: Paul Saenz <forensicneoph...@gmail.com > <mailto:forensicneoph...@gmail.com>> > Subject: Re: [LinuxUsers] RTM/LMGTFY responses > To: SoCal LUG Users List <linuxusers@socallinux.org > <mailto:linuxusers@socallinux.org>> > Message-ID: <BANLkTi=othier1cwb66c8mg3z8rbjus...@mail.gmail.com > <mailto:othier1cwb66c8mg3z8rbjus...@mail.gmail.com>> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 8:01 AM, Mark Holmquist > <marktrac...@gmail.com <mailto:marktrac...@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > First, Linux is not a business. It is a community project, and > it *works* that way. Canonical, >RH, Novell, and the like are > businesses, but this mailing list is a bunch of loosely-organized > >volunteers. > > Did I say that SocalLinux was a business? If I said that , then that > was a misstatement. I thought that what I said was that LInux was a > business, and I think it's safe to stand by that statement. Whether > you look at it from the standpoint of kernel development, the > individual distros or GNU or even the user, Linux is conducted as a > serious business. > > Even though it is presented as a community centered project, if I'm > not mistaken, because I could be wrong, but I had the impression that > there are many, if not the majority of significant development > contributors who get paid at least a reasonable if not competitive > tech salary, or contract. Nevertheless, regardless of that they, for > the most part, have a chain of command, goals, and business procedures > to say the least. They treat their business like a job, because they > want to make sure that their salary, or at least their client?le > continues through to the next year and the year after that. > > I don't think I would be putting my head out on the chopping block if > I were to say that there is a strong possibility that the majority of > Linux users use Linux primarily for business. Regardless of having a > large number of people who would probably fit in the category of > hobbyist, it is still a business. Radio Control cars is a business > even though basically all RC car drivers are hobbyists. > > There are members in this group who qualify, if they do not at least > have a remote potential to contribute to those goals and prerogatives. > I think Ragi and others are bringing out some really good viewpoints > on the discussion of some Linux goals and direction. I know that Linux > is a big community, and it's kind of like far away in a distant land, > but they are having a discussion that at least parts of it would > probably be worthy of at least a once over by the Linux Execs. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > LinuxUsers mailing list > LinuxUsers@socallinux.org > http://socallinux.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linuxusers > -- Ann Richmond ---------------- Randr Inc 951-369-3427 951-787-8683 Fax www.randrinc.com
_______________________________________________ LinuxUsers mailing list LinuxUsers@socallinux.org http://socallinux.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linuxusers
