Currently, companies and analysts measure open source's success according to the performance of the companies which work with open source. Especially profit and sales numbers are important. This is a perfect example of the old-fashioned habit to review success solely based on financial aspects. I wonder however, if this is the best benchmark, and if open source's success be 'measured' at all?

Success in the world of open source has nothing to do with financial numbers. A company can go bankrupt, or choose to go in a whole different direction. But if this company has been occupied with an open source project, than this does not necessarily mean that this project has to end. The future of an open source project is namely dependent of other aspects as well, such as the enthusiasm, dependency and commitment of the community and of course the determined market opportunities.

Ḿorten Minke: 'When assessing numerous successful open source projects, it is very clear that the success of the project is largely determined by the community surrounding the project.'

When assessing numerous successful open source projects, it is very clear that the success of the project is largely determined by the community surrounding the project. The Linux kernel and the Apache web server for instance, are not directly connected to a single company. The success of these projects can therefore never be expressed in financial numbers. The critical success of such projects lies within the community and the final users of the software. An open source project should also never have to answer to a board of sharehoulders, nor should decisions be made only because they are financially attractive.

Confusion arouses when a company plays a big part in the development of the project. The company automatically becomes 'the face' of the project and it might look like the project and the company are the same, even though they are not. These companies are part of the community as well as everybody else involved in the project and as with every project, layers of responsibility are needed to manage the project properly. The fact that this management is sometimes done by individuals (like Linus Torvalds) and sometimes done by companies (like Sun with OpenOffice) does not say anything about the fact that the existence of this project would be connected with this 'leader'.

Contrary to what is thought by some fanatics, commercialization does not necessarily have to be a bad thing as well. Turning a project into a product (directly or indirectly by providing service) can result in a wider target group of users, and thereby more support for the project. While open source becomes more and more known within businesses, the companies' role in a project becomes increasingly important. By delivering support and guarantees, more and more groups dare to switch to an 'alternative' for their existing traditional software.

Therefore, the companies' success can actually influence the success of an open source project. Every company or individual could put a certain amount of effort in the parts of the project that are most important to their customers. Under the condition that everything fits within the common thoughts and methods within the community of course, because that's were the project's success in determined.