Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 13th Aug 2010 22:21 UTC, submitted by Cytor
Sun Solaris, OpenSolaris Well, Oracle went from one of those big enterprise-serving companies most of us don't deal with to one of the more hated companies in our little community. Not only did they just sue Google over Android and its use of Java-related technologies, they also just officially killed off OpenSolaris. Solaris will still be open source, but source code will only come after each major release - development will happen behind closed doors.
Permalink for comment 436856
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:

(Disclosure: I support FOSS in all of its variations, but I think FOSS is better for offering alternatives to the proprietary ways and for "scratching your itch" than it is for making money.)

I'm sorry, but this is an painfully false dichotomy. In fact, I would argue that the open source model is a greater source of profit than closed source (exhibit A: the web), because the concept of charging people for infrastructure software is outmoded, awkward, and expensive.

For example, a company I worked for has a supercomputing cluster with thousands of machines. If we installed proprietary databases, operating systems, and storage systems, the licensing costs alone would consume our entire margin. How is that business-friendly? Open source software was the only reason we could make money, in stark contrast to what you say.

But it's not just niche exercises like clustered computing that benefit. Open source software and open standards allow for the creation of whole ecosystems, so that people can expend their creative energy building new and novel products, not reinventing the wheel. As I said before, the web is a great example of how open source software democratized infrastructure and created a whole new market, with a corresponding explosion of wealth.

The value of any app is not in what platform it runs on or which technologies it uses, but what utility it delivers to customers. You don't visit a website because it was written in ASP or because it's served by IIS. You visit it for its function. What does the nature of the source code's licensing have to do with that? And if open source software is inherently cheaper than closed source, than isn't it better from a financial perspective?

To label open source software as "unfriendly to business" is ignorant at best. Open source software is inherently business-friendly. The real culprit here is corporate hubris, where dictatorial control and short-term yield are the only metrics for success.

Reply Parent Score: 3