Re: Making money on open source, if not by selling _support_, then how?

["Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com>]

"Justin Gombos" <rpbkbq.xax.gld@uluv.kbq> wrote in message
news:z5S_f.4049$XI6.1174@trnddc05...
> There are intrinsic rewards with creating GNU software.  When you say
> "rewarding" here, are you talking purely in terms of remuneration
> (that is, extrinsic rewards)?

I don''t see any reason to restrict the intrinsic rewards to "GNU software".
I've stuck with Ada (despite the high probablity that I could make more
money doing something else) simply because I find Ada better, more fun, etc.
than the alternatives.

But that doesn't provide a means of support. No matter what benefits to
overall society there are, if the individual creators cannot support
themselves, they'll have to do something else. Which means no creations at
all.

It's this argument that tars "open source" with the "communist" label (since
that is the only way to decouple means of support from the act of creating
software). And, in any case, it's unrealistic. I don't see any intrinsic
reason that "open source" has to be incompatible with capitalism, but it's
quite important that the creators get some of the rewards. In the current
world, it is the leeches of the world (marketers, lawyers, etc.) that get
most of the money; the creators get little of it. Open source seems to
change that equation to ensure that the leeches get *all* of the money. (I
presume that's the *real* reason it has become popular...)

I'm less concerned about that in cases where there is no money (such as most
Ada utilities libraries). 100% or 0% of nothing is still the same amount...

                              Randy.