Popular open source news - Business Models

Software developers who want to make a living in open source often consider becoming independent consultants. This advice from two successful developers may help you get started.

Zack Urlocker of MySQL fame was at the Stanford Accel Symposium earlier this week and, along with some other open-source heavyweights, participated on a panel that attempted to cull some lessons learned in building open-source businesses.

The criticisms of OpenOffice governance lain by Michael Meeks bring up a follow-up question, namely, how should open source projects be governed? Boards and committees are fine. Structure is a necessity. Transparency is obvious. The real question is, should there be a name on the door, someone who takes the place of the CEO or (better still) the entrepreneur at a proprietary company?

The cost of launching a tech venture is continually falling, due to a large number of interrelated technical, social, and financial factors. It's part of the reason why there are more startups founded in undergraduate universities, business grad schools, and by young entrepreneurs who have small savings, if any, to seed their ideas.

Open source is a business tactic, not a business model. Open source is not a market in and of itself, nor is it a vertical segment of the market. Open source is a software development and/or distribution model that is enabled by a licensing tactic.

I was confused when Dave Rosenberg told me that he was leaving MuleSource to pursue a game startup. "But you are already the CEO of a startup," I remonstrated. Given his longstanding interest in video games, however, it was probably just a matter of time.

Open source software topped the list of business "risk factors" outlined in Microsoft's annual 10-K report to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, published last week. The emphasis seems a little surprising.