On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 7:14 PM, Ian Dees <ian.d...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 11:16 AM, SteveC <st...@asklater.com> wrote: >> >> There is a slight contradiction here though because the other thing I hear >> a lot is they'd like to try something with us but keep it quiet - i.e. try >> something small, but that's extremely hard with an open community. > > I find the exact opposite: the majority of the projects related to OSM in > the past few years have been done in relative quiet. The tools that OSMers > use are developed by a small group (or single person) in a bunker somewhere.
+1 I also think the companies like to tell Steve that they're the next Sun or Red Hat (opening everyhing up). But when the board meeting comes, they start thinking NT/TA licensing fees is just a cost that they pass on to their customers. If they help OSM, then it will also help their competitors and will not really improve the bottom line. Furthermore, once OSM competes with NT/TA, they may have to compete with the "person in the bunker". > Are we not there yet because we're scaring them off? If so, maybe the > community could open its mind and eyes a little bit when ideas like these > come in instead of scaring them off with questions about legality and server > load and whatnot. That is much easier said than done. Companies are quite wary of launching the next "New Coke". To explain it in OSM terminology: Let's say a company devises a new web site and it has scientifically proof that it is better (e.g. blind tests). Then some people may still see it as a faceless company prescribing to a community what they should do. Throw in a few words like "profiteering" and it can generate some undeserved bad press for the company. _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk