1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
|
two principle ways in which people make money with free software
development
modern economic models around fs development closely resemble early models
keep in mind that software freedom is as old as software
"proprietarization" of software began in the 1970s
apparently pioneered by IBM
furthered by companies like "Micro-Soft"
and Bill Gates who in 1976 published his Open Letter to Hobbyists
software was usually, if not always, distributed with source code
usually either at no cost or at the cost of making and shipping copies
programmers were paid for the time they spent working on software
not for the software itself
we see the same thing today
programmers are paid to work on software
the software is distributed freely (w/o restrictions) often even gratis
example: Linux
powerful and stable high-performance kernel
found in everything from TVs and phones to supercomputers
as of 2010, >70% of work done on Linux is done by paid programmers
at least 659 companies have supported development of Linux
compare that to development of MS Windows, supported by one company
AMD's recent hirings
show that if you can improve a company's sw, they might hire you
example: Qt
flexible cross-platform application framework
popular in desktop & embedded applications
most developers are employed by Nokia
example: GNAT
Ada compiler, now part of GNU Compiler Collection
developed by New York University under $3M contract from USAF in 1992
(C) assigned to FSF and sw released under GPL
why do companies pay for the development of sw that few people pay for?
they have a financial interest in high-quality software
many companies offer paid support for the software -- more later
many sell hardware on which the software is run
servers, wireless network adapters, cameras, TVs, phones, cars
many see fs as a way to save money and avoid reinventing the wheel
e.g. AMD and Coreboot (or so I suspect)
AMD no longer has to pay for the custom development of BIOSes
they use an existing fs solution, adapt it to work with their hw
also, most software is custom software, which is technically free
companies/people pay programmers to write software
this software isn't released publicly
but if there's 1 user, and that user has the rights, the sw is free
free in a trivial sense
support
with proprietary sw, only the copyright holder is allowed to understand sw
only they can support it
the support is a monopoly
with fs, everyone is allowed to understand it and support it
support is a free market
individuals make money making changes to fs programs
either supporting their own programs of any other fs programs
again, paid to work, not paid for the work
individuals & companies sell consulting services & support contracts for fs
Cygnus, Red Hat (announced income last year of almost $1B), Canonical
Nokia/Digia and Qt Partners
AdaCore
as Mark pointed out, also Sencha
Debian has a list of 824 consultants in 63 countries
FSF lists 86 individuals and companies offering services in fs
additionally, some people sell free software
they can charge a fee for distribution, even of someone else's work
it may go against the traditional fs development economic model
but it's not inherently unethical or even illegal
in the 1980s, RMS himself sold copies of GNU Emacs
made about $1300/mo
|
