Some… Interesting responses to the big QNX news and interview today.
I have been called ‘unethical’ for saying “QNX is opening up its source code”. A reader on OSNews claims that with that, I am “redefining” the meaning of open source - and that’s what he calls unethical. Ridiculous, of course. The code is open. You can look at it. Compile it. Change it. Alter it. For personal use. You can keep those changes for yourself. You can share those changes with the QNX community. You just can’t sell those changes - you can’t exploit your work commercially. In order to do that, you need to pay royalties to QNX.
Which makes total sense.
Unlike other companies such as IBM and Sun, QSS is actually quite a small company. The only stream of revenue the company has is its operating system and the services it provides. Compare this to a big shot like Sun, who does not only sell a boatload of software and services, but also has an extremely important hardware business. Sun can afford to be ‘more’ open source than QNX simply because to Sun, Solaris is financially actually fairly irrelevant. It’s by far not their greatest source of income.
QSS (QNX Software Systems) has done the right thing by their hybrid software model. They allow everyone to look at the code, download it, compile it, change it, share it with their peers or keep it to themselves, heck, they can even make a distribution and put that online - they are just not allowed to sell it. Which is logical, because else the ‘altered’ QNX versions would directly compete with QSS, and seeing those altered versions would leech for 99% off QSS’s hard work, they would be infinitely cheaper (if not free).
On top of that, by choosing this model, they made sure that their biggest competitors (VxWorks, Microsoft, and commercial Linux ‘embedders’) are forced into a ‘Τάνταλος torture‘ - they can look at it all they want, but they cannot use it for their own good.
I’m sure a healthy community can be built around QNX. I sure hope it can, in any case.