Am 11/28/2011 06:11 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 11:27 AM, Marcus (OOo)<marcus.m...@wtnet.de> wrote:
Am 11/28/2011 05:48 AM, schrieb Dave Fisher:
<snip>
I changed the MirrorBrain row to make it clear that this issue only
effects the legacy OOo downloads. All AOO releases will be on the Apache
Mirror system.
Perhaps download.services.openoffice.org is one way that AOO can team up
with TOOo?
Maybe not a bad idea. AOO will take care of the code and produces the source
release (and maybe also some binary releases) and hosting of install files
can be done by TOO. Could be a good thing of collaboration.
So I'm afraid that business models based on things like this are doomed to fail:
[Deleted that stuff as I wasn't talking about businesses]
Business models that might work, include:
1) Having a derivative of OpenOffice under a different name that
distinguishes itself in some way that users value, and by building a
unique brand name around these values, get traffic to your website,
where you can then sell ads, ask for contributions, etc.
As there will be no future release of OOo (when we skip the *maybe*
3.3.1 release) this is no option. Of course it has to be a different name.
2) Having an independent company that is clearly distinguished from
Apache and the AOO, that accepts donations or payment to add features
or fix bugs in AOO. Of course, one needs to be sensitive to the fact
that you can never guarantee that a given feature will be accepted by
other committers.
... except when doing it themselves. ;-) When there is an already
settled committer then you can do the commits yourself. I hope that new
(well-planned and well-structured) features will be welcome.
3) Deployment, migration services, customization, training, extension
development for enterprise users of OpenOffice.
Yes, the typical options around open source software because with the
application itself you cannot make single a penny.
Perhaps there are other good business models?
Marcus
