http://dirkriehle.com/2009/06/19/commercial-open-source-the-naming-confusion-remains/ Dirk Riehle's blog about everything computer science, applied and more Fri, 12 Mar 2010 00:25:02 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 http://dirkriehle.com/2009/06/19/commercial-open-source-the-naming-confusion-remains/comment-page-1/#comment-3524 Dirk Riehle Sat, 20 Jun 2009 18:24:35 +0000 http://dirkriehle.com/?p=1042#comment-3524 Good point, and I wonder. The term "single-vendor open source" seems neutral enough. It may actually beneficial to the vendor because the worry is (or at least used to be) that someone uses your code to compete with you. So single-vendor signals to customers that there is only one place for products and services... Good point, and I wonder. The term “single-vendor open source” seems neutral enough. It may actually beneficial to the vendor because the worry is (or at least used to be) that someone uses your code to compete with you. So single-vendor signals to customers that there is only one place for products and services…

]]> http://dirkriehle.com/2009/06/19/commercial-open-source-the-naming-confusion-remains/comment-page-1/#comment-3506 Jack Herrick Sat, 20 Jun 2009 06:12:40 +0000 http://dirkriehle.com/?p=1042#comment-3506 Single vendor open source does seem to explain it a bit better. Of course, the term will be more likely to gain traction if the companies practicing that business model are willing to refer to themselves this way. Any sense if they are willing to make that switch? Single vendor open source does seem to explain it a bit better. Of course, the term will be more likely to gain traction if the companies practicing that business model are willing to refer to themselves this way. Any sense if they are willing to make that switch?

]]>