> Let's face it: They realized their product was popular, took advantage of tons of interest and documentation/blogs/hype in the community, then decided to charge for binary distribution. It's a bit of a burn.

Or another way of looking at it: Open source has to be subsidized (either through free time or commercial backing) in order to continue to contribute to open source. The amount of time and effort to maintain a popular open source product is insane. They are creating a business model to continue to subsidize their open source contributions. Whats the alternative? Burnout and stagnation which would just result in forks and fracturing of the community if they are lucky.