• About
  • Archive
  • Privacy & Policy
  • Contact
Dana Blankenhorn
  • Home
  • About Dana
  • Posts
  • Contact Dana
  • Archive
  • A-clue.com
No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • About Dana
  • Posts
  • Contact Dana
  • Archive
  • A-clue.com
No Result
View All Result
Dana Blankenhorn
No Result
View All Result
Home business models

Google Is Not Open Source’s Daddy

by Dana Blankenhorn
March 31, 2011
in business models, business strategy, e-commerce, ethics, intellectual property, Internet, investment, open source, software
0
0
SHARES
4
VIEWS
Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Who-is-your-daddy Google has been a great ally to the open source movement.

Google has helped Linux scale. Google has broken through the age-old question of “desktop Linux” with Android, a Linux distro, and the coming Honeycomb. Google has contributed immense quantities of code to the Apache Foundation, and given to other projects as well.

But Google is not open source's daddy. And it's a mistake for open source advocates to see Google as anything but what it is, which is a corporate entity seeking profits.


Whos-your-daddy I wrote here recently that Google has finally learned the Little Red Hen lesson with Android  and decided it must control the operating environment with Honeycomb to deliver consumers a uniform experience.

I applauded the move. Among followers of open source I was pretty much alone in that.

As I expected, some analysts are calling this a betrayal of open source, arguing that going downstream with a uniform Android code base is somehow evil. It's not. It's necessary if the word Android is going to mean anything in the market, and if the amount of manufacturer and carrier “crapware” on the platform is to be limited.

At the same time, Google's Chris DiBona has offered another lame set of excuses as to why Google rejects the Affero GPL. He claimed it was about “engineering time.”

This is even more laughable than letting Virginia Commonwealth's basketball team into the NCAA tournament. Yes, I know they're in the Final Four – that's the point here. Self-interest.

Google uses open source in order to benefit its business. It doesn't let the “principles” of open source get in the way of that business. Google's business is to be the low-cost provider of Internet stuff – connectivity, files, answers. Its secret sauce is in its online systems, and no it's not going to share them because of some principle.

I can respect that. Every company must follow self-interest first.

Which is why open source, as a movement, can't make itself dependent on any corporate model. And why every open source user has to keep corporate interests at arms-length.

What Oracle's purchase of Sun did, what it was intended to do, was to break this idea that being a corporate sponsor was the same thing as following a principle. It's called free enterprise because we're all free to serve our own self-interest, and so it must be with open source.

Open source is a set of principles. It can be used as a business model, as a development model, as a way to make money, but it is first and foremost a set of principles, principles that work. Sharing the enormous cost of hand-making this essential good of software – and it is still mostly hand-made – is essential to making the competitive market in technology work.

Google as ma bell It's fine when one company builds a railroad, but we know from history that even if government aid is essential to that endeavor, it's still the company's railroad, and they will use every effort to exploit that advantage for private gain. How much better it is to have shared infrastructure, a highway system, to which every business has access, so every business can compete.

Sharing the costs of essential infrastructure is what open source is all about. Google shares more of those costs than any other company I know of. But expecting Google, as a private entity, to be open source's daddy is expecting too much.

 

 

 

 

Tags: Androidbusiness modelsGoogleHoneycombinfrastructureopen sourceopen source principlesshared infrastructure
Previous Post

Next Post

Why the Economy Still Sucks (And Why It Won’t For Much Longer)

Dana Blankenhorn

Dana Blankenhorn

Dana Blankenhorn began his career as a financial journalist in 1978, began covering technology in 1982, and the Internet in 1985. He started one of the first Internet daily newsletters, the Interactive Age Daily, in 1994. He recently retired from InvestorPlace and lives in Atlanta, GA, preparing for his next great adventure. He's a graduate of Rice University (1977) and Northwestern's Medill School of Journalism (MSJ 1978). He's a native of Massapequa, NY.

Next Post
Why the Economy Still Sucks (And Why It Won’t For Much Longer)

Why the Economy Still Sucks (And Why It Won't For Much Longer)

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Recent Post

AI is a Tool

AI is a Tool

May 22, 2025
The E-Transport Minority

Twilight of the Bike-y Bike

May 21, 2025
The Ultimate Scam

The Ultimate Scam

May 20, 2025
Game Changer

Game Changer

May 19, 2025
Subscribe to our mailing list to receives daily updates direct to your inbox!


Archives

Categories

Recent Comments

  • Dana Blankenhorn on The Death of Video
  • danablank on The Problem of the Moment (Is Not the Problem of the Moment)
  • cipit88 on The Problem of the Moment (Is Not the Problem of the Moment)
  • danablank on What I Learned on my European Vacation
  • danablank on Boomer Roomers

I'm Dana Blankenhorn. I have covered the Internet as a reporter since 1983. I've been a professional business reporter since 1978, and a writer all my life.

  • Italian Trulli

Browse by Category

Newsletter


Powered by FeedBlitz
  • About
  • Archive
  • Privacy & Policy
  • Contact

© 2023 Dana Blankenhorn - All Rights Reserved

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • About Dana
  • Posts
  • Contact Dana
  • Archive
  • A-clue.com

© 2023 Dana Blankenhorn - All Rights Reserved