The problem with the tech media (conventional media and tech blogosphere) is that they are way too deep into proprietary software and hit based economic models. This has resulted in way too many misinterpretations about open source. We saw how Nicholas Carr had completely misunderstood the functioning of open source. We also saw how Dan Farber and others used the term open source to purely imply a business model whereas open source is a platform on which various business models plays out. When the open source movement was formed, it was done with an idea to create an environment where various business models can be implemented on top of a platform developed by the free software movement. The proponents of open source, at least most of them, didn’t roll out open source as a yet another business model. Rather, they created an environment, with a pool of more accommodative licenses, so that the business community (and consumers) could benefit from the advantages of the freedom behind the free software. The underlying principle between both the free software movement and open source movement is the freedom to do anything you want with the software, the freedom to choose any version of the software, the freedom to choose any flavor of the software, etc. Open source movement has taken this freedom to business community and their customers with their accommodative approach. Unfortunately, the tech media doesn’t seem to get this point at all. This misunderstanding (or, rather, non understanding) is the reason why we have Nicholas Carr, Dan Farber and, even to some extent, Tim O’ Reilly making predictions about the demise of open source. If they understand that open source is just a platform on which various business models compete with each other, they will be able to avoid making such predictions about the death of open source and concentrate on finding out business models that can better utilize the freedom offered by open source, thereby offering consumers with better user experience. Read more of this post