By definition, free and open source software (FOSS) is opposed to proprietary companies. But, as Jim Zemlin and Stephen J. Vaughan-Nichols have pointed out recently, the FOSS community does not regard all proprietary companies with equal disdain.

Whether for private users, small and midsize businesses, major corporations, or public institutions, Open Source software has in the past years become a reliable alternative to commercial solutions. And not just because it is less expensive. Businesses are becoming increasingly convinced of the quality of this free software.

Tim believes that open source, at least as defined by open-source licensing, has a short shelf life that will be consumed by Web 2.0 (i.e., Web companies hijacking open-source software to deliver proprietary Web services) or by traditional proprietary software vendors.

The market for open source and free software is surging high with its appreciation in mainstream segment also... But still the concept of free software and open source software is not clear with many of us.

I remain frustrated by the complete lack of marketing and business sense that many open source companies continue to display. I thought that we were past the whole foolishness of competing in the ghetto amongst ourselves vs. the big proprietary guys with lots of dough but it seems that the argument has just started taking other forms.

Editor: This is a work of satire, hope you enjoy it. The heated battle between paper companies and proprietary EHR companies for market share is always fascinating to watch. Linux Medical News labs weighs in on the subject by doing a rigorous, side-by-side comparison of Paper company products vs. proprietary Electronic Health Record software company products. The results may surprise you.

A decade ago, European countries leapt out of the gate to take the lead in the radical open source movement -- none more so than France -- and left US developers in the proverbial dust.

One of the most surprising recent developments in the field of openness has been the rise of Europe as a key player there. This is not the result of some grand plan, despite what the conspiracy theorists in proprietary software companies might think, but simply a natural evolution of the European Union itself, and a consequence of its attempts to become more tightly integrated.

We all know there are plenty of reasons to be in favor of open source software. It increases personal freedom, it helps people become better developers by sharing in the advances made by others, it provides many eyes to find bugs, it can respond more quickly to changing market demands, and so on. But what about reasons for corporations to get involved?