[albertoCaroM]

I suppose It's joke.

There are countless successful open source projects (libraries , frameworks and languages).

Open source have come to stay, besides, nobody forbidden you to put a price if you have a opensource project and you want to give a premium experience, with extra features, maintenance or even a technical support.

[101001001001]

Not a joke! There are reasons why this fundamental truth has been obscured for the short amount of time that software has existed on a meaningful scale. One of them is the unique property of software not needing any physical resources to be created or distributed. The other is the cultural circumstances surrounding software historically, where often people were being pioneers with their contributions, contributing to the grand vision of computers and the internet which only very recently has been realized. And the average programmer historically was very intelligent and wealthy. It was a set of circumstances that created the illusion that the shackles of capitalism had been broken. But they haven’t. And as the circumstances change it only becomes more clear that free labor won’t be a successful model for software. And this doesn’t come as a surprise to anyone who has closely scrutinized the whole picture.

And the whole thing is made worse by the politicization of free software. People respect free software because it is “virtuous.” It’s a very short sighted notion that shares its roots with communism. If pure intentions counted then both might be successful but unfortunately it’s not the case.

To say that Linux was the last free software was obviously hyperbole. But the conclusion I have drawn is correct and you will see this whether you reflect on it now or stick around long enough to see the economics play out.