Quoting Matias Klein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: ... > Sometimes open-source contributors become detached from the realities > regarding the forces motivating software development efforts.
Matias, That's why it is invaluable to hear your view of the "realities". Thanks in advance. ... > No one is attacking open-source. The AAFP situation has nothing to do with "attacking open-source". Rather, I think it is an useful case-study on how _not_ to start an open-source project. ... > In our model, the cost > savings of open-source are passed on to the customer (who really doesn't > care about or understand open-source). Right, and hopefully they will never have to understand the difference, since you will be in business forever and will never deviate from your up-standing business practice. Some software vendors never black-mail their customers even when they can, you probably plan to belong to that group. On the other hand, how do you price your product? Purely based on your costs or somewhat based on what the market will bear? As time goes on, dependence on your software will increase, and the market will be willing to pay you more per unit of software. Why should you turn away potential profit? Why would you not maximize profit? Why would you not use your market "dominance" to protect your market share? No one is attacking closed-source. All we are doing is offering an alternative path to the one that all successful closed-source efforts eventually face. Do you think you will be increasingly successful? ... As you said, most physicians don't realize the difference between closed-source and open-source yet. In time, they will - just like the business people who are now waking up to the difference. Join us, it may not too late for you yet. By the time you hit $32B/year, it will be much harder to switch over. :-) Best regards, Andrew --- Andrew P. Ho, M.D. OIO: Open Infrastructure for Outcomes www.TxOutcome.Org
