Closed OSes exist for Closed content

[Andy Green]

Leszek Matok wrote:
> Dnia 03-04-2006, pon o godzinie 08:45 +0100, Andy Green napisał(a):

>> the model allows one 
>> copy of the install media to bleed into and dupe itself wherever it is 
>> wanted.  If that is one seat or 1,000 it makes little difference to a 
>> Free OS like Fedora since it has no per-seat income.

> Yes it has. Firstly, companies like our sponsor Red Hat get money from
> sold copies and donate some part of it to 1. OSS projects development,

I was speaking about specifically Fedora.  RHAT get $0 from "sold 
copies" of Fedora AFAIK.  RHEL is sold, and the Redhat Desktop thing 
seems to be sold, or maybe just the support contracts are sold.

> 2. fight software patents. Secondly, for any OSS project every user
> means 1. bigger chance to find a bug, 2. bigger chance to gain more
> developers.

Right, but the proposal was that Linux must operate under "competitive 
pressure".  It seems like that could mean something, but it doesn't mean 
for Fedora what it means for, say, a traditional Unix vendor.  If they 
make $100 per seat per year then 1000 seats means something important to 
them and if some other OS gets it instead it hurts.  Presumably everyone 
here is happy if those 1000 seats go to Fedora, but if it does not, 
something less than a $100,000 loss has happened to a Free OS, since 
they would not have seen the money anyway: the less tangible losses you 
describe take place.  "Competition" for users would seem to mean 
something different where a Free OS is concerned then.

-Andy

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 4492 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20060403/1558e7a4/attachment-0002.bin