Heater wrote: ↑
Fri Nov 15, 2019 11:12 am
What would make this kind of idea attractive is if I could deploy software and updates to my fleet of remote Pi and other machines but I could choose which operator I want to use and I could change operator if need be.
The problem is that without some form of lockin how would they monetize it? This is one of the biggest issues with FOSS and where I suspect my views differ significantly from Stallman's. However, the lockin had better be a service contract, rather than a proprietary solution than I can't get my stuff out of.
There has to be "something" in it for the developer. Could be fame, reputation building, brand recognition, or could be money. But the cold hard reality is that it takes a time investment to develop software, and for the vast majority of us, time == money. Contributing at a hobby level is workable for lots of folks, but doing the heavy lifting serious development requires much more time and than means someone needs to pay for it. There is also the issue of support. For some stuff I am good with self support, with other stuff I want the ability to buy 24x7, high availability to subject matter experts.
I am fine with buying software (paying developers) and paying for services. However, I want to make sure I have a clean exit strategy, should the supplier close up shop. My data is mine. Sticking with open formats, and Linux mostly means if some package developer shuts down, either someone else will pick it up, fork it, or worst case I can take my data and use another tool.