• RickRussell_CA@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    1 year ago

    Linux is still kicking as an independent project 30 years in, despite the success of monetizing it. The EEE strategy has been tried by many.

    Granted, that’s in no small part because Linus Torvalds keeps driving it. It will be interesting to see how he manages succession in the next few years.

      • RickRussell_CA@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Although, I would argue that what RH is doing is more “monetizing their investment” rather than a EEE strategy. Red Hat has done some wonderful things for the Linux ecosystem, and it absolutely sucks that they are trying to move their work under support contracts when it used to be freely available. But RedHat is not really essential for the Linux enterprise. You can buy robust support for several flavors of Debian, and of course SUSE is still out there kicking it old school.

    • dsemy@vlemmy.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Linux is a very unique project in many ways, so I don’t think it’s the best example.

      • dodgypast@vlemmy.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        1 year ago

        There’s Wikipedia as another example.

        We shouldn’t let them make us act like we’ve already lost.

        • dsemy@vlemmy.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Wikipedia is also a bad example though…

          ActivityPub, as a protocol, is particularly vulnerable to EEE, since a corporation can create their own implementation and still talk to existing instances - allowing them to gradually extend the protocol, without forcing a mass migration to their service from the get go.

          With Wikipedia, for example, they would basically have to create a competing site, and users of Wikipedia will not see any content from that site unless they actively go to it.

          Edit: BTW, I don’t see this as admitting defeat; if anything, these migrations from service to service over time show that the corporations never win in the long run.

          • NotTheOnlyGamer@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            With Wikipedia, for example, they would basically have to create a competing site, and users of Wikipedia will not see any content from that site unless they actively go to it.

            So… Wikia, aka Fandom?

            • dsemy@vlemmy.net
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Fandom and Wikipedia are both wikis, but they serve a different purpose, they don’t really compete with each other AFAIK.

    • Nomecks@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      The big difference is that the Linux Foundation and Wikipedia are non profit organizations. Companies exist to make money plain and simple. You cannot use a company to improve society, since profit is ultimately the only motive. Even the most altruistic of company owners will die eventually, and profit will become the driver again at some point. Non profits are the only way to maintain humanity advancing projects, since money isn’t the motive.

    • iRyu@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Not that it’s a lot, but I think the success of the Steam Deck is going to positively contribute to Linux, too.