
Some Thoughts on Open Core - jrepinc
https://www.linuxjournal.com/content/some-thoughts-open-core
======
alien_
I agree that open core is not ideal if you do it to the extreme as described
in the article, but it can be done with moderation to get much more money,
which could be invested in the open source part and have it thrive as well,
like for example done by Sidekick.

From my experience the alternative support and donations business models don't
really work. I'm the initial author and maintainer of Autospotting, a piece of
software that saved the users in the millions dollars aggregated over my
entire user base, and as much as I tried so far I couldn't get much money out
of it.

I'm currently getting about $100 monthly on Patreon for support plans and a
few donations here and there but that's nothing compared to the effort I put
in it and the value it creates.

~~~
jammygit
Foss desktop software is so hard to monetize. At least with servers you can
charge for cloud features (though then the user has given up some control in
that scenario).

Industry associations seem to help, like the Linux foundation, where company
stakeholders come together to fund the development and get a say in its
direction - eg, if the different cloud providers banded together to fork mongo
and/or redis in this way (to the unfortunate and severe detriment of the
founders)

Possibly purism is pioneering a hardware driven angle too?

~~~
diffeomorphism
I think that this is in large part due to hurdles of paying for software
easily.

For example

[https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.iiordanov....](https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.iiordanov.freebVNC&hl=en_US)

and

[https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.iiordanov....](https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.iiordanov.bVNC&hl=en_US)

are the same GPL licensed software either gratis or for $5. Just buying it via
the store is straightforward instead of figuring out where the homepage is,
finding a donate button, entering credit card details... .

Having more non-gratis but free software would be a good thing

[https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.en.html](https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.en.html)

~~~
alien_
That's actually a great idea, thanks for sharing it!

I'll try to make it paid from the mobile phone.

------
dhh2106
I don't understand what the offer suggests companies do instead?

Service based models (with training, support or integration) also can have
perverse incentives on the open source software. To make those services
valuable, you need the product to be worse than it otherwise could be.

Additionally, the characterization that open core companies stop improving the
open source software and only improve the proprietary software might be true
at some firms but is the extreme.

------
stephenr
I have a theory that open source which mostly targets business use could be
funded by providing binary releases in the form of an apt/etc repo.

Small/Medium businesses increasingly seem to prefer to just pay for the
solution (rather than say paying a staff member to compile, test, and
distribute something open source).

~~~
alien_
That's pretty much what I also tried to do with AutoSpotting but very few
people bothered to pay for it.

I suspect the problem is that the people who're using the software are techies
who would rather enjoy spending some time compiling it and setting it up
themselves, maybe learning some things in the process, instead of paying for
it.

This kind of software would have to be sold to CEO/CTO folks who then ask the
developers to set it up afterwards.

~~~
stephenr
Right, I think it helps if it provides primarily a business function rather
than provides something developers might interact with directly.

