On 2/19/21 12:49 AM, Aaron Puchert wrote:
Am 18.02.21 um 07:42 schrieb John Paul Adrian
On 2/18/21 6:49 AM, Thorsten Kukuk wrote:
No, because you don't pay for SLE as
product, but for support and
Actually, you do as large amounts of open source code is developed by paid
developers, for example for the Linux kernel .
That's where most of the money ends up, but Thorsten is probably right that most
SUSE customers have more the support and maintenance in mind when they pay you.
The basement dwelling Unix neckbeard that is
primarily driving the open
development at no charge has been a myth for a very long time already.
Let's be fair, it's a bit of both (if we include volunteer contributors at
building levels and without facial hair). Of course some projects have mostly
corporate contributions, but there are also many (often smaller) projects that
have mostly volunteer contributors.
Volunteer contributors are negligible when it comes to larger changes at the codebase
or regular contributions. Maintaining a kernel port or working on GCC is almost
always a full time job.
For example, the m68k and vax backends in GCC still had to be converted to MODE_CC
and there were no volunteers to work on that issue. So to get these tasks done, I
actually had to start a Bountysource campaign for each:
If you look at commit diffs each, you see that those aren't changes that a hobbyist
makes over a weekend:
There is no
Technically the lunch is free: all of these programs are available free of charge, there
are no hidden costs and there is no other way you end up paying for it. It's not
social media where you pay with your data.
That was not my point. I was not talking about the software itself. I was talking about
the development work. Professional developer time is expensive and virtually all big
corperations like Intel, AMD or IBM have paid developers working on Linux hardware
Some younger Linux may not remember this, but there used to be times where it
be taken for granted that you could buy a rather recent piece of hardware and Linux
would work on it out of the box. Hardware support was much much worse and the fact
that it works out of the box these days is because Linux has become so mainstream,
that hardware vendors write the drivers themselves.
Software and other kinds of "IP" have near
zero marginal cost. So somebody has to pay
for it, but once its paid for, everybody can get it for free if the license allows it.
There is virtually no cost to providing the software to more people, so the "no free
theorem doesn't apply in my view.
That's not the point at all. The point is that someone actually pays for the
of the software. The difference is simply whether the end result is shared with
customers or not. That doesn't change the fact that Linux is mostly developed by paid
Try getting a new backend into LLVM, Go or the kernel. It's _almost_ impossible if
don't have a corporate backing. I know this from first hand because I'm
on getting an M68k backend upstreamed into LLVM. Getting a new backend into Go is
impossible unless you're a big corporation.
Which is not a bad thing: people in third world
countries can also download and install
openSUSE for free and none of us need to bothered by it (ignoring the support cost and
considering the software).
People often just buy pirated versions of Windows in these countries. If you go to China
or Vietnam, you can buy knock-off versions of Windows for a fraction of the original
in regular shops. In Shenzhen in particular, you can basically buy cheap knock-offs of