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=0.6 required=5.0 tests=AC_FROM_MANY_DOTS,BAYES_00, HK_RANDOM_FROM autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,afb4d45672b1e262 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!news2.google.com!news4.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!cyclone1.gnilink.net!spamkiller.gnilink.net!gnilink.net!trnddc08.POSTED!20ae255c!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada From: Justin Gombos Subject: Re: Making money on open source, if not by selling _support_, then how? References: <7NOdne-iYtWmIafZnZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@megapath.net> <292bf$443bb4e4$45491254$20549@KNOLOGY.NET> <443bf77d$0$11063$9b4e6d93@newsread4.arcor-online.net> <443d10f4$0$18264$9b4e6d93@newsread2.arcor-online.net> User-Agent: slrn/0.9.8.1 (Linux) Message-ID: Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 19:33:36 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.44.77.228 X-Complaints-To: abuse@verizon.net X-Trace: trnddc08 1145129616 129.44.77.228 (Sat, 15 Apr 2006 15:33:36 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 15:33:36 EDT Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:3832 Date: 2006-04-15T19:33:36+00:00 List-Id: On 2006-04-12, Georg Bauhaus wrote: > Justin Gombos wrote: > > Conflicting interests can also bring software production back on > track. How about this: Sometimes programmers go astray and enjoy > themselves writing wonderfully sophisticated "high quality" > Ada. Meanwhile the toaster company goes out of business because > their embedded temperature sensors will be so great, when they will > finally arrive... Right, so high quality products can have side effects, one of which is lengthy development time. This doesn't diminish the quality, but rather the viability for the toaster company to leverage business gain from whatever open source project they've targeted. Your example requires you to combine two different open source models. If the toaster company funds the development, then their interests are in the forefront of the project, enabling them to control both the quality and direction of the project. If the toaster company is not funding the effort, then they have no expectation of what direction the product will take. In this case, the problem is not with the open source project they're trying to use, but rather the toaster company's inability to plan ahead and select the right tool for the job (and insource what they need if their supplier can't deliver what they need, when they need it). > How could we possibly know which interest are the ones that make us > write the really great software products? What exactly is the one > interest in the set of conflicting interests that should dominate > because no compromise can be better? In terms of pure quality, interests that favor quality should dominate opposing interests, obviously. One way or another, profits and rapid production are often the competing interest that reduces quality. If you're focused on the bottom line, you must limit quality to that of the requirement; you would be a poor businessman if you didn't. Because the open source paradigm (particularly the non-profit variety) is largely free from these conflicts, it naturally acquires the charactoristics inherent in producing great products. > Maybe there is not so much a compromising compromise but rather a > method of combining the various interests into a satisfying solution > to a problem. Presuming a problem is well defined, ever, in the real > world. Sure, a /satisfying/ solution (with satisfactory product quality) has more tolerance for accommodating other interests, such as rapid development and profit margin. -- PM instructions: do a C4esar Ciph3r on my address; retain punctuation.