I hear what your saying but I just don't get it. It's all how we view things I guess. From my perspective Making money while solving problems is good thing. No reason to be shy about it.
The goal is to innovate, never hurt innovation, let people innovate, fix, hack, break, etc so better things get made. The open source movement is a humanistic movement, that people deserve better and will naturally make better things if we allow them too.
The goal of open source isn't to stop making money. The GPL specifically encourages companies to exist to support and make money off of software. The problem is from a business standpoint its very profitable to make somebody dependent on your product.
This is where we meet the breaking point. Their goals are different, a business wants to exploit while open source wants to grow.
How do we fix this? Adoption. When you try to sell a service to a company, namely a technology company being open source is a positive for one simple reason.
>If you fail they won't lose the service.
Its the ultimate insurance. They don't have to bet the farm on your company. It makes it easier to bid and grow on software as your failure isn't tied to your plateform's failure. Which is often the largest issue with new technology companies.
Nobody would buy an IBM mainframe if IBM started last year. Nobody would have faith, or believe. You can't do the same stunts as companies that are decades old who built the industry as a new kid on the block.
