Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 22nd May 2008 20:54 UTC
More often than not, the question arises on OSNews why certain projects or pieces of abandonware aren't released as open source software. Supposedly, this would speed up development, facilitate the growth of a community, all that jazz associated with open source development. Here are four projects I'd like to see released under a MIT license.
Thread beginning with comment 315385
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: monetary compensation
by trenchsol on Fri 23rd May 2008 19:06
in reply to "RE: monetary compensation"
Member since:2006-12-07
Solaris and QNX are business oriented. Solaris is in server business and QNX is (was) in embedded systems. That model could work for them. What about Amiga OS. It is a gaming platform. Selling support and education does not work. It is more likely that some big name, like Sony skim the cream by building their own platform on top of it.
RE[3]: monetary compensation
by AmigaRobbo on Fri 23rd May 2008 20:03
in reply to "RE[2]: monetary compensation"
Member since:2005-11-15
Member since:
2006-08-26
Let me give you two stories and see which one has more potential for compensation. Take operating system A, which is in a dying mode, meaning there is almost no new adoption and most people are retiring it. QNX might be in this camp, as a lot of companies look to embedded versions of Linux. Amiga OS 4.0 is in this camp as well. It's difficult to find and you either need to shuck out $1500 for a G3/G4 based system or happen to have hardware from a defunct manufacturer. Sure, you can sell a few copies here and there, but really, it's just a matter of time before it's not worth keeping the lights on.
Operating system B, seeing the writing on the wall, goes open source. I would argue one big reason Solaris went this route is to stay relevant in the face of Linux (especially with Sun selling x86 hardware). By going open source Sun still makes revenue of Solaris by selling 1) support contracts, 2) services and 3) their systems to run Solaris. That could apply to Amiga OS 4 in the following way: 1) Hyperion sells services to hardware vendors that wan to ship OS 4 as the O/S, 2) Hyperion sells the official "distro.", 3) Hyperion offers paid support contracts to end users and 4) Hyperion offers developer training and support. This would even be more lucrative for QNX, since it's mainly used by embedded developers that need support to port to various architectures and board packages. Essentially, for QNX, you're trading any per unit license fees for annual fees so QNX developers to care about your particular development problem.
There is also a value in free. For example, if OS 4 goes open source and is wildly successful, someone may step in to buy Hyperion, and thus the developers would get compensated. Or, in the case of QNX, someone may step in to buy QNX. The very real danger, however, is that the underlying OS is more myth than actual value, in which case no one will really use it (open source or not). In that case I doubt the product/company would fold any faster.