Difference between revisions of "Value of open source"
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | + | http://www.computerworlduk.com/toolbox/open-source/blogs/index.cfm?entryid=3010&blogid=14 | |
| + | |||
| + | Quotes: | ||
| + | |||
| + | "open source solutions save money for customers by doing away with the fat margins for existing computer companies – and thus shrink the overall market". As Whitehurst pointed out, open source software typically costs just 10% of the proprietary equivalent, and so the profits – and outflows - are reduced proportionately. | ||
| + | |||
| + | However, there is a very important corollary to this – the point that Whitehurst made several times. Indeed, practically his opening words were: “selling free software is hard”. A knock-on consequence is that it harder – roughly *ten* times harder - for an open source company to grow to a given revenue level than it is for the corresponding proprietary company. | ||
[[Category:mbi]] | [[Category:mbi]] | ||
Latest revision as of 20:05, 27 August 2020
http://www.computerworlduk.com/toolbox/open-source/blogs/index.cfm?entryid=3010&blogid=14
Quotes:
"open source solutions save money for customers by doing away with the fat margins for existing computer companies – and thus shrink the overall market". As Whitehurst pointed out, open source software typically costs just 10% of the proprietary equivalent, and so the profits – and outflows - are reduced proportionately.
However, there is a very important corollary to this – the point that Whitehurst made several times. Indeed, practically his opening words were: “selling free software is hard”. A knock-on consequence is that it harder – roughly *ten* times harder - for an open source company to grow to a given revenue level than it is for the corresponding proprietary company.
