Quote:
Originally Posted by GrouchyAdmin
You don't make money if you give it away for free. I don't mind small questions or things like that, but if you don't want to pay, keep on moving.
|
This is worthy of a quote, since an exchange recently turned my ideas. I'm all for open source because without it, I wouldn't be were I am today. I also stand corrected on my opening sentence that I'm only here for the profit - yes I am and no I'm not. The time I invest in other people's affairs does not reward me monetarily in the way way the kick I get out of problem solving. Without a problem to be solved, I get bored, very easily. For that problem solving, I get paid, win win.
Now, back to OSS, and bear with me here - I don't just help out any old client - I help out hose mainly that can run things on their own, but require a little help. I don't want to get bogged down with XYZ,ABC day in day out, unless they're paying me a monthly retainer. And this is where OSS comes in - most of this clientèle can do 99% themselves, but require that little extra polish to finish things off.
So OSS is a godsend for them.
The other side of the coin though....
Jack Sprat, can't be arsed to do anything, download eg Wordpress, puts up a blog, does fuck all, profits. OK, those days are long gone, but still, puts up some OSS tube, does fuck all, profits. Meanwhile, Jane Doe works her ass off categorising all content, launching niche site etc, tube site etc, profits. But pays $1000/mo in software fees.
The adult world is already a niche. Can that niche support itself that is already under pressure from freeloaders, by launching OSS to allow man+dog to come in and do what he pleases?
The problem that goes with closed source software is the support with it. Konrad made a mix between the two - the script was open source, but not distributable (hey Konrad, I've not seen any license agreements in your scripts ;) ), which lends itself to pirating (and I'm sure it's rife). But he combats that with high fees to start with.
Where is the middle ground?
When it's open source, there is no middle ground - benefits of very fast advancement in code architecture, but massive influx in kiddies. Closed source stifles development due to costs involved in software support and development. Open (non-encrypted) source is costly as it has to outweigh pirating, but has the advantage to let others run free from base.....
Tanguy was spot on with this question, and I've made a full turn on the subject (at least in my head)
