if you see it from another view you will see that they arenot work completely free:
so it is mutual beneficial relations (a big example also for that is new Microsoft chromium Edge) which based on google chrome code base
- developers just don't add only to the opensource community but also gain (not funds only) but sharpen their skills more by seeing new coding ideas contributed by the other and fork for another projects (which make them avoid starting from scratch)
- opensource code eligible anyone (according to licence EULA) to redistribute the code which benefits you to embed it in another projects
- the founder also benefits if the project success it may produce enterprise (commericial) version with fees lower that intellectual one which make them more competitive (red hat Linux Distro) for example (by the aid of opensource community giving away fredora as reward
Time represent a cost. why you re invent the bicycle again if you have all its components free to use
Not denying that there aren't any benefits, but it still remains the fact that when people hear open source, the first thing that comes to a lot of people's mind is the word free.
Ironically Linux development is quite backed up by Microsoft it is one of the biggest donator among others.
Linux Mint is an elegant, easy to use, up to date and comfortable GNU/Linux desktop distribution.linuxmint.com
so of course, i laugh at those Linux fanboys hating MS while MS in fact is contributing heavily to the well-being of Linux.
It is quite funny and ironic TBH. The company they are hating on, is the one that is supporting them the most. Personally I don't think they even know anymore who they are competing with. I think they like to hate on MS, because that the cool thing to do. I still think they would be better off working together, rather than someone just going their own way and doing their own thing, which seems to be the norm with Linux.
Linux never became popular because the Linux community does not support:
1. The most widely-used software used in business (such as Microsoft Office)
2. A desktop system that panders and caters to helpless typical users (the user is actually expected to learn and do themselves)
To be fair, I never said it was the sole reason, I said it was one of the reasons which is true. Linux is way too diluted to even make sense of it all. Instead of working together, they all decide to do their own thing. Why is it that the first question that someone asks when switching to Linux is which distro do I use? There are many reasons as to why Linux never made it big time, but the fact that there are too many distros to count on two hands is a problem IMHO.
they hate for the same reason that anti-Google\Chrome\Chrome OS\Chromebook people hate here
privacy blah, blah, blah
there is an ideology behind FOSS also - no copyright - therefore Microsoft is the devil
Microsoft's Linux Foundation membership is questionable
it remains to be seen exactly what Microsoft is up to
many in FOSS argue, and rightly so, that Microsoft wants to shape Linux for its own ends
Microsoft has prove through its own actions whether it is really supporting Linux or just having another one of its corporate profit agendas
Steve Ballmer once called Linux a cancer
as it turns out the real societal cancers are Windows, Microsoft Office and Microsoft itself
it holds the world hostage
Well business is business that's what's this is all about. If it wasn't MS, it would be someone else. Playing devils advocate here, but to be brutally honest (not saying this is right by any means), it seems like MS is beating them at their own game. They want source code that anyone can use and redistribute, check, don't have to pay for the source code, check, etc.... FOSS wanted this utopia for software, it will never happen when business and money is involved. Like I said earlier, if it wasn't MS, it would be someone else. That's just how business works.