Comments on: Open vs. Closed: Jimmy Wales on Being Open

By: Guru

Guru — Wed, 10 Nov 2010 04:09:06 +0000

Great insights. At the end of the day, open or closed, it is a matter of sustainability to the scale in any (if not business model) model. All complexities can be managed.

By: Linux News » Wikipedia Founder Jimmy Wales On Being Open

Linux News » Wikipedia Founder Jimmy Wales On Being Open — Thu, 06 May 2010 20:20:40 +0000

[...] says that a large part of the success of Wikipedia is due to taking an open approach to content, as GigaOM reports. The widely used “open-source encyclopedia” has grown to the point where it now [...]

By: Thorstena » Freie Kultur: Netzbasierte Ökosysteme im Dienste globaler Wissenskonzerne?

Thu, 06 May 2010 18:31:33 +0000

[...] an ecosystem and then making money in various other ways”: Das ist laut Wikipedia-Mitbegründer Jimmy Wales die wirtschaftliche Essenz einer offenen Internetkultur, die frei von restriktiven [...]

By: Links 1/5/2010: Fedora Kiosk Spin, Many New Sugar-based XOs | Techrights

Links 1/5/2010: Fedora Kiosk Spin, Many New Sugar-based XOs | Techrights — Sat, 01 May 2010 19:06:37 +0000

[...] Open vs. Closed: Jimmy Wales on Being Open Wales: One of the key pieces there for me is that there are some business models around Linux, but those business models — like Red Hat — have tended to focus on the server market, where certainly in the web-surfing world, the LAMP stack [Linux, Apache, MySQL and PHP] is dominant. And it is dominant in that area in part because there emerged business models that made it possible for people to do things in a sustainable way, whereas Linux on the desktop so far hasn’t really generated a business model. If you think about Android, it can be open source, or very nearly open source, and that doesn’t hurt its chances of succeeding simply because Google has a business model around it that has nothing to do with selling the software. They can fund it, they can support it, and it makes business sense for them to do so, in a way that it has never made a lot of business sense for anybody to really spend the money to get Linux on the desktop to that kind of polished state. [...]

By: Sovereign John

Sovereign John — Sat, 01 May 2010 15:37:58 +0000

This article gives everyone something to think about. Anytime I hear the word 'open' I am interested in how the term is used as I go back to George Orwell's book, 'The Open Conspiracy'.

Thanks for the article. A great read.

By: Chris K

Chris K — Fri, 30 Apr 2010 21:36:46 +0000

Apple does have a list of upfront standards in what apps cannot do. And guidelines for UI design etc.

And to be fair the app store is younger than Wikipedia and its growth has been dramatic. The approval/rejection processes and standards naturally lag this growth.

And to be fair, the Wikipedia foundation owns the website. That's who has ultimate control over the site.

By: Rich

Rich — Fri, 30 Apr 2010 19:37:28 +0000

Jimmy Wales' comments sound right to me.

By: Stepshep

Stepshep — Fri, 30 Apr 2010 16:17:45 +0000

To be fair though. Wikipedia says upfront what its standards are and works with new editors to help them keep their content. The deletion process is very open and run by the community. Apple has secret rules run by a group of employees.

By: Chris K

Chris K — Fri, 30 Apr 2010 14:51:10 +0000

Wikipedia is just like the App store.

Anyone can make an entry.

Anyone can make an app.

Wikipedia has final say though. If they want something gone then it's gone. They have a set of rules etc.

Apple has final say though. If they want something gone then it's gone. They also have a set of rules etc.

By: Open vs. Closed | Digital Asset Management

Open vs. Closed | Digital Asset Management — Fri, 30 Apr 2010 06:22:19 +0000

[...] Open vs. Closed: Jimmy Wales on Being Open. [...]