Inspired by the “Google introducing competing open source Dolby Vision/Atmos standards” post and some of the great discussion there:
“Amazing new free open source standard freeing us all from closed / licensed tyranny”
vs.
“Giant corporation arriving late to standards competition hides behind “open source” as it uses it’s dominance to force fragmentation on everyone else”
My starter comment is this: whenever a new “open” project is proposed it should be independently evaluated as “good” as though it were closed source and the competitor open. Is “open-ness” being abused by companies when they find themselves in a market position they don’t like?
“Amazing new free open source standard freeing us all from closed / licensed tyranny”
vs.
“Giant corporation arriving late to standards competition hides behind “open source” as it uses it’s dominance to force fragmentation on everyone else”
My starter comment is this: whenever a new “open” project is proposed it should be independently evaluated as “good” as though it were closed source and the competitor open. Is “open-ness” being abused by companies when they find themselves in a market position they don’t like?