2) give it away, building market share and awareness
3) shake down corporations making money from your open source product in the form of "licensing & maintenance agreement*
4) Trickle down effect on non corporate users who in turn feed back into the loop by performing QA and community support.
I personally believe this is the future of software, at least someone who is competing against VC funded proprietary entities looking to IPO and not really give a shit about the product that brought them in a position to raise money.
What do you guys think? This is just my opinion of course downsides to this model.
One major downside of openin the doors to everybody is you get a ton of noises. People who shouldn't be using it complaining and it's always tricky to manage, especially when people feel entitled to it as it is free.
An argument to this noise is that any noise is better than no noise, meaning any type of engagement good or bad is considered a plus for the app, to discover new shit
1) create a popular open source product
2) give it away, building market share and awareness
3) shake down corporations making money from your open source product in the form of "licensing & maintenance agreement*
4) Trickle down effect on non corporate users who in turn feed back into the loop by performing QA and community support.
I personally believe this is the future of software, at least someone who is competing against VC funded proprietary entities looking to IPO and not really give a shit about the product that brought them in a position to raise money.
What do you guys think? This is just my opinion of course downsides to this model.
One major downside of openin the doors to everybody is you get a ton of noises. People who shouldn't be using it complaining and it's always tricky to manage, especially when people feel entitled to it as it is free.
An argument to this noise is that any noise is better than no noise, meaning any type of engagement good or bad is considered a plus for the app, to discover new shit