News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:New iPhone Agreement Bans Flash-to-iPhone Compiler & Others by nailer on Friday April 09, 2010 @05:00AM (#1252248)
> > Red Hat, Canonical, and Google are just some of the companies that have found valid business models around "free software".

> That's a fallacy.

> The majority of open-source sponsors are selling closed systems or services to sponsor their "free software" involvement.

Red Hat, Canonical and a large chunk of IBM GS wouldn't be able to sell those services with proprietary products - the OSS licensing of various Linux OSs, Apache, etc. are the basis for them being able to have an audience to sell their services.

I agree with you re: Google. They're not a service business and could have written their own OS or used a proprietary one and not affect revenue.

Re:New iPhone Agreement Bans Flash-to-iPhone Compiler & Others by stcredzero on Friday April 09, 2010 @08:52AM (#1252531)
I agree with you re: Google. They're not a service business and could have written their own OS or used a proprietary one and not affect revenue.

Not sure what licensing fees would have done to their overhead costs in the early days.