Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Trying to understand the motivation here.

In principle, what's the difference between my company taking advantage of open source software (cost savings, huge advantage because I don't have to build everything in-house) and a company that offers a hosted version of said software?

In both cases, I am benefitting economically and not contributing upstream.



The difference is that Redis Labs competes with one type and doesn’t compete with the other. That’s the only difference.

I’d love to hear Salvatore Sanfilippo’s take…


Oof.


The difference is the second company is earning money directly off the labour of open source software ... that and the fact that the second company is worth billions.

None of this would have happened if AWS etc had of supported the open source contributors and projects that they were relying upon in some meaningful way.

I actually support this move and wish RedisLabs the best of luck.


What if the first company is also worth billions and hasn't contributed anything upstream? How is that any different?


The revenue component is still different. In the first case, they are saving the cost of purchasing equivalent software. In the second, they are earning money. It's a subtle but important difference.


I'd actually argue the company that doesn't have to purchase / build it themselves is reaping more benefit, since for many startups, this distinction can be existential.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: