From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.4 required=5.0 tests=AC_FROM_MANY_DOTS,BAYES_00 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,ac39a12d5faf5b14 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-04-23 23:11:07 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!130.240.42.8!luth.se!psiuk-p2!psiuk-p3!uknet!psiuk-n!news.pace.co.uk!nh.pace.co.uk!not-for-mail From: "Marin David Condic" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: How Open Source software developers pay the bills, from within a successful such operation (was): Open Source: in conflict with the development process in the Ada community? Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2002 16:48:55 -0400 Organization: Posted on a server owned by Pace Micro Technology plc Message-ID: References: <3CB94312.5040802@snafu.de> <4519e058.0204150645.62003096@posting.google.com> <3CBCEB15.E104D1F5@adaworks.com> <35c5c360dfe83cb34ea9648445bd0e95.48257@mygate.mailgate.org> <5ee5b646.0204190620.1902ede@posting.google.com> <5ee5b646.0204201744.587dfec7@posting.google.com> <5ee5b646.0204230444.6684ac@posting.google.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: dhcp-200-133.miami.pace.co.uk X-Trace: nh.pace.co.uk 1019594938 15727 136.170.200.133 (23 Apr 2002 20:48:58 GMT) X-Complaints-To: newsmaster@news.cam.pace.co.uk NNTP-Posting-Date: 23 Apr 2002 20:48:58 GMT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:23034 Date: 2002-04-23T20:48:58+00:00 List-Id: Then maybe we're in violent agreement. I don't doubt that having open source might make for building a fire under a company to continue to provide support and innovate because the barriers to entry are lower for someone else to come along and do so as well. Its possible that this is a critical selling point to the end customer - depending on the product and customer. I'd continue to contend that the barriers are not infinite even without open source - just higher. And even Microsoft with large resources and high barriers to competitors are not in a position to avoid innovation. They have to at least do what the car companies do with model year changes - keep the guts unchanged but bend the sheet metal a little different - or nobody wants to buy the next generation. As for the wisdom of that strategy? ACT seems to be making it work and other companies have been successful by adopting a rapid-innovation and customer-centric approach. Other companies have been successful for long stretches of time without changing their products much at all (witness the VW Beetle). So the answer seems to be - as with many things in life - "It Depends". Is open source critical to that success? Maybe. Maybe its just the current software-buyer's fad - like tailfins. Maybe it depends on the product at hand. In any case, its hard to argue with success. Incidentally, I had not heard it called "bottom feeding". I've heard it called "milking the cash cow". Bottom feeding is what I've associated with a stock-buying strategy - find hurting to bankrupt companies and buy the stock for less than the liquidation value. But I could see how a twist of the phrase could apply to scouring up the crumbs of business left with a product as it decays. MDC -- Marin David Condic Senior Software Engineer Pace Micro Technology Americas www.pacemicro.com Enabling the digital revolution e-Mail: marin.condic@pacemicro.com "Robert Dewar" wrote in message news:5ee5b646.0204230444.6684ac@posting.google.com... > > You miss the point. Of course this (behavior commonly referred to as > "bottom feeding") cannot persist for long with respect to a particular > product, but it is remarkably common for a company with a proprietary