New version of the Beekeeper Model for Commercial Open Source
The first draft of the new Beekeeper Model for commercial open source is ready for feedback: click to download the PDF
The new version includes:
- Analogies for proprietary development (Maple Syrup Farm) and open source projects (Wild Hives) in addition to the commercial open source model.
- Introduction and analogy for Services/Support model (contributed by Matt Aslett at 451 Group)
- External references section.
- New overall flow.
I think it is a significant improvement over the original. Any feedback would be greatly appreciated.
Update – Feedback so far :
- Doug Moran, Julian Hyde, Jem Matzen, thanks as always.
- Roberto Gallopini: http://robertogaloppini.net/2009/04/11/open-source-business-strategy-feedback-on-the-beekeeper-model-revisited/
- Tarus Balog, OpenNMS: http://blogs.opennms.org/?p=764
James Dixon's Blog 
[…] Now James released the first draft of the new version asking for comments, and I am glad to give him some feedback again. […]
Open Source Business Strategy: Feedback on the Beekeeper Model Revisited
April 11, 2009 at 10:43 am
[…] bees and trees We noted last week that James Dixon, CTO of Pentaho, had updated his Beekeeper model for understanding the commercial-community relationships employed by vendors to […]
451 CAOS Theory » 451 CAOS Links 2009.04.14
April 14, 2009 at 4:44 pm
[…] James has updated the model, incorporating a number of changes, including some suggested by me as a means by which […]
451 CAOS Theory » Understanding commercial open source via the Bee Keeper model
April 27, 2009 at 1:38 pm
[…] order to think about how to apply this thinking, Philippe offered the beekeeper model, which is an open source business model which separates the process of sharing knowledge from […]
The Value of Sharing Knowledge | IC Knowledge Center
May 13, 2009 at 1:35 pm
[…] I noticed that James Dixon uses the term “single-vendor commercial open source” in his Beekeeper model, so this makes at least two of us who are unhappy with the use of “commercial open […]
Commercial Open Source: The Naming Confusion Remains
June 26, 2009 at 2:10 pm