Reflecting on Open Source business models

… and about the difference between interface and implementation.

So Mike shared his view on Open Source business models and which ones might be viable in the long run. While I agree with some of his observations such as

But pure-play open source companies never survive. That’s a law of nature.

I disagree with what he said in both the post and in a follow-up convo we had over on Twitter:

The platform must be open source. Storage is platform.

Besides the fact that infrastructure-level engineering is different from application-level software development, the reason why I disagree is that his line of argumentation mixes up interfaces and implementations. Of course, it’s really about open interfaces vs. proprietary interfaces. What’s wrong with providing a superior implementation for an open, community-agreed API?

Now, as I said already on Twitter to Mike: welcome to the club! With this post he essentially acknowledged and validated the strategy we at MapR had from the very beginning on: combining Open Source and own IP to drive innovation, enabling our customers to benefit from both worlds and not to forget: building a sustainable business around it.

Update (2013-10-08): Our CEO and co-founder John Schroeder has provided a comprehensive explanation of MapR’s business model in his post Built to Last: How MapR’s Business Model Supports That Goal.