Each OSS based company defines its own "Open Source business model"
Redhat's business model cannot be compared with Valinux's because
they focus on different market shares. Please note that I merely gave
an example: I tried to show that even the OSS based company with the highest
potential did not obtain sufficient revenue. Companies which produce Linux
have lower revenue potential
On Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 09:40:32PM +0300, Adi Stav wrote:
> I wonder if we could even come up with an agreed upon definition of
> "open source business model". I suspect it is no less bogus than
> "Internet business model".
>
> People and companies make money the way they always have, which either
> is by offering products and services to others who wish to pay for
> them, or by taking it by force in some way. This is not going to
> change. Opensource/Free software might be involved to an extent, or
> not at all.
>
> I can't, in any way, see how Red Hat's business model can be even
> COMPARED with, for example, VA Linux's original business model, much
> less referred to with the same term. VA Linux's model was selling
> computer hardware! This is the farthest from unproven as you can get
> in the IT industry. Way too proven, in fact, because it forces
> competition with several players with as many as 50 years of
> experience.
>
> =================================================================
> To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
> the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command
> echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
=================================================================
To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command
echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
