|It's obvious that Bruce is nolonger an Open Source advocate, but returned to Free Software. On a funny side, he and RMS now disagree on wether making GPLed software is financially viable.
RMS says yes and has examples. Including himself and selling Emacs copies and "making more money from it than ever before".
Bruce says no. The GPL is making is "deliberately" hard to make money in his words.
I personally believe, the GPL is a typical customer licence. Probably e.g. a company making software for banks would suffer from offering it under GPL. But if some banks agreed on making a common effort under GPL, that would save lots of costs for them and giving them more control and efficiecy. This actually happens, because e.g. Dresdener & Kleinwort "open sourced" their risk management software.
So the most money with GPL is made from collaboration of customers to their own benefit.
Apache as probably the first business success story of Free Software was founded from patches against the first web server from CERN. Users, normally customers, found it much interesting to make a common effort and share the results.
Everything that is infrastructure for work is going to be Free Software. Simply because it's going to be better infrastructure more and more.
[ Reply to This ]