← Back to context

Comment by coldpie

17 days ago

> You have to fund it from selling a product.

Well, no. Most people in the world get paid for doing a thing. I pay someone $X and they do Y for me and then I have the Y that I wanted done.

This can work for software too. Someone pays me to develop software that does something useful for them, and then they have the thing they wanted. For example if Wine is missing a feature someone can pay me to implement it, and then everyone involved is happy.

I agree it's a more challenging business model, but it does work.

6 comments

coldpie

Reply
Ekaros  17 days ago

Money must come from somewhere. And by selling a product I mean a phone. Or box doing something. With Wine, well Valve sells games and want those games to run on something else than platform they were build for.

In the end product is being sold originally to fund that development. Software can also be pure product enabling company to do something or consumer to do something. But in that case open-source is likely incidental. Not the product.

  • coldpie  17 days ago

    In your first comment you said, "why would I pay for [software] if it is provided for free?" And you're right, you don't. What you pay for is for someone to develop software/features that don't exist yet. Maybe the users of the phone you sell want some new feature. Then it's done and everyone's happy and even better you don't need to pay for the entire project to be built from scratch or pay ongoing license fees or whatever. That's how you monetize open source.

sallveburrpi  17 days ago

What are some examples of big OSS projects that work with this model? Aka “pay us to get feature X?”

It sounds to me that this would invite an insane level of bloat and one-off features.

  • coldpie  17 days ago

    Igalia, Collabora, Red Hat, GCC, LLVM, Wine, the entire Linux kernel. Tons of open source consulting companies out there working on all kinds of projects.