<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Open-Source Business Models Aren&#039;t Dead-End Streets</title>
	<atom:link href="http://gigaom.com/2009/11/30/open-source-business-models-arent-dead-end-streets/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://gigaom.com/2009/11/30/open-source-business-models-arent-dead-end-streets/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 03:13:59 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Open-source business model generates heat.. &#171; In pursuit of CrAzYnEsS!</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2009/11/30/open-source-business-models-arent-dead-end-streets/#comment-231806</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Open-source business model generates heat.. &#171; In pursuit of CrAzYnEsS!]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 May 2010 09:56:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=83314#comment-231806</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;p&gt;[...] Gigaom discusses and amends the above article  [...]&lt;/p&gt;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Gigaom discusses and amends the above article  [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Open-Source Business Models Aren?t Dead-End Streets &#8211; Gigaom.com &#124; VishwaTech IT News</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2009/11/30/open-source-business-models-arent-dead-end-streets/#comment-231805</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Open-Source Business Models Aren?t Dead-End Streets &#8211; Gigaom.com &#124; VishwaTech IT News]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Dec 2009 16:01:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=83314#comment-231805</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;p&gt;[...] posted here: Open-Source Business Models Aren?t Dead-End Streets &#8211; Gigaom.com    ﻿   Leave a [...]&lt;/p&gt;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] posted here: Open-Source Business Models Aren?t Dead-End Streets &#8211; Gigaom.com    ﻿   Leave a [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Scott LaPlant</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2009/11/30/open-source-business-models-arent-dead-end-streets/#comment-231804</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Scott LaPlant]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Dec 2009 13:54:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=83314#comment-231804</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;p&gt;Excellent article.  I think you could make an excellent case for Wordpress.  Their business model is shrewd as well and, not in an evil shrewd kind of way.  They give their base product away and build around it with services - everything from comment spam prevention, to hosting and enhanced commenting services.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;While companies like twitter seemed to have peeked or at least their traffic has, Wordpress has seen an increase as of late.  Certainly not as large as Microsoft or Red Hat but, give them time&lt;/p&gt;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Excellent article.  I think you could make an excellent case for WordPress.  Their business model is shrewd as well and, not in an evil shrewd kind of way.  They give their base product away and build around it with services &#8211; everything from comment spam prevention, to hosting and enhanced commenting services.</p>
<p>While companies like twitter seemed to have peeked or at least their traffic has, WordPress has seen an increase as of late.  Certainly not as large as Microsoft or Red Hat but, give them time</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tim Nash</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2009/11/30/open-source-business-models-arent-dead-end-streets/#comment-231803</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Tim Nash]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Dec 2009 08:29:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=83314#comment-231803</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;p&gt;Google&#039;s drive with Android always has been to block Windows Mobile. As I wrote, a year ago, in http://lowendmac.com/nash/08tn/google-android-g1.html&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;All Google wants from the G1 is that Android is seen as better than Windows Mobile.  Manufacturers and carriers unable to sell the iPhone need an alternative. If Android looks better, they won&#039;t take up Windows Mobile where Microsoft would serve up the ads. So Google&#039;s main interest in Android is in making sure that Windows Mobile does not succeed. Giving Open Source developers a home, so that they don&#039;t work on a less Google-friendly mobile OS, is an added bonus.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Will Microsoft now buy their way on to the iPhone to make Bing the default choice?&lt;/p&gt;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Google&#8217;s drive with Android always has been to block Windows Mobile. As I wrote, a year ago, in <a href="http://lowendmac.com/nash/08tn/google-android-g1.html" rel="nofollow">http://lowendmac.com/nash/08tn/google-android-g1.html</a></p>
<p>All Google wants from the G1 is that Android is seen as better than Windows Mobile.  Manufacturers and carriers unable to sell the iPhone need an alternative. If Android looks better, they won&#8217;t take up Windows Mobile where Microsoft would serve up the ads. So Google&#8217;s main interest in Android is in making sure that Windows Mobile does not succeed. Giving Open Source developers a home, so that they don&#8217;t work on a less Google-friendly mobile OS, is an added bonus.</p>
<p>Will Microsoft now buy their way on to the iPhone to make Bing the default choice?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
