王澄说的"网上志愿者免费（free）在网上写程序"字面上不能等同于"Open Source"，现在一些公司完全商业化的运作，但是软件发行却采用GPL或者类似的授权方式。王澄关于医学专业分工的结论我是认同的，但举例子论述不对。王澄说的盖茨的讲话可能来在下面最后一段，阅读整段话，可以看出盖茨想要表达的和王澄转述的不是一回事。盖茨作为微软公司的创始人，虽然不再为微软工作，但是在自由软件这个话题上面说话能反映出微软公司的态度，一定会相当谨慎。盖茨在强调商业软件对于Linux这样的软件优势在整合上面，而且价格上面他认为基于Open Source的方案可能更贵。
What is our view of Linux? I point out that Linux like Unix is not a single thing - it is many different systems that are not the same. The point that Linux is diverse is not one we are good at making. People who develop for RedHat Linux need to test for UnitedLinux. When people like SGI or HP enhance Linux you don’t get all those enhancements in one version -in fact just like Unix each company wants to have something that it does better and even though some pieces of source code are there it doesn’t mean that the pieces are integrated and tested together. 1 explain how the commercial model allows for testing and binary upwards compatibility.
What about Linux price? I explain how Linux plus Websphere is more expensive than Windows equivalent and Linux plus Oracle is more expensive than Windows equivalent. I explain how the richness of the platform that we sell for $500 just keeps getting richers - directory, certificates, app server, etc etc. I explain that for most projects the licensed OS is only a few percent of what people spend and getting the right platform can save much more than a few percent on the development, management, richness of the app, hardware flexibility, communications cost etc.. I say that is places where customers are very price sensitive like Education we have had special prices that are 15% of normal and we will keep those prices low enough to get very broad usage in education.
What about platform innovation - doesn’t Linux have more people doing cool stuff?. I gave the analogy of someone saying that the new 747 competitor is being designed by an OpenSource Airplane design group. The interdependencies and need for parallel coordinated innovation requires a commercial model with risk taking. A new 747 can’t be done by a non commercial model. I say that an opensource model could take an old design and have people do cloning and modest improvements on various aspects independently. I give tablet as an example of something that required changes in many aspects on the system -getting Office to do its work and handwriting recognition and new platform capabilities. I say that Linux is not where advances like great games, or tablet or management have come or will come despite the openness. I explain the things like community involvement we have learned from Linux. I go back to the argument above that we are forced in to do big advances or else or installed base will have “share” but there will be no revenue for us. I talk about Stallman’s view that there shouldn’t be jobs doing commercial software and how that would cut off a whole range of innovations that have come from the commercial world.