Why does the open source model not work for Microsoft? What is Microsoft's business model?
February 28th, 2010 | 
Author: Is there an advantage of the open source model in terms of software quality? Do you see that in real life in terms of the open source software that you use?
Posted in Q&A | 
Tags: advantage, business model, microsoft, open source model, open source software, software quality
Open-source allows programs to become more advanced more quickly because you have so many different people working on it at once. Open-source programs tend to be more stable because if there’s a bug, it gets caught right away and someone fixes it on the spot.
Microsoft’s business model is pretty simple. They charge money for their software. If it was open-source, they couldn’t charge for it. They keep it closed-source and proprietary in the hopes that nobody will copy them and steal their business.
Open-source projects don’t make money directly from the sale of their software. They often make money from offering training services or additional products or hardware.
To put it simply, when an application or software is open source it generally stands to gain very little profit. That is, companies who wish to make money off of their services never release the source, as that would jeopardize the integrity of their profits.
However, open source projects can be modified or developed by anyone, so the quality differs from project to project.
I’m going to compare Microsoft Windows to a generic open source Linux build.
The Linux build is free, and can be developed my any of the thousands of people who use it. With input from so many, the progress is rather fast.
In order to compete, Microsoft must release a product that people think is significantly better than the free Linux build. That is, the advantage must be significant enough that people are willing to pay. If people are willing to pay money for Microsoft’s product because the qualities unique to Windows are worth paying for, then Microsoft has succeeded. If people don’t think that the benefits of Windows are worth the money and would rather stick to a free Linux build, then Microsoft has failed.
I hope this helps to answer your question.