InfoWorld: Build vs. Buy
Jan 24, 2006, 01:45 (0 Talkback[s])
(Other stories by Matt Asay)
Desktop-as-a-Service Designed for Any Cloud ? Nutanix Frame
Victorian Marriage and Open Source
"VCs ply project leads with promises of enterprise glory and IPO
wealth. Corporations try to lure developers with the promise of
temporal comfort--a comfy salary and expanded influence.
"Maybe this is a good thing. I'm certainly a fan of commercial
open source, as I believe that the more money developers can make
from open source development, the more of such development there
will be. But I wonder if the 'marital offer' corporations and
capital makes to the development community is sometimes a bit crass
and, well, material..."
Building vs. Buying Open Source Communities
"Leaving aside the question as to whether one actually can buy
community (see my separate post), I don't believe it's an easy task
under the best of circumstances, for the same reason that most
acquisitions fail to deliver their promised benefits. Combining
corporate/community cultures is tremendously difficult. Combining
the business models these entail is only slightly less so.
"I'm an Arsenal supporter. I despise Chelsea. Part of the reason
I dislike Chelsea is that it's clearly a 'buy community' kind of
soccer (football) club. I think the Russian mafia (ahem, Roman
Abromovich) has injected nearly $500 million into the club, buying
up an immensely deep bench of talented players..."