* marketing term<p>* bait and switch<p>* hold over from zero
interest rates - get users and worry later about monetization<p>* emerging legit business models that use open core
No idea. Open source seems to come and go in waves. It has pros and cons as a business model. Personally I prefer working on open source because my GitHub becomes my resume, whereas in closed source interviews are needed to determine basic skills.
I have zero empirical data to back it up but as a freelance I.T. consultant, my gut instinct is that part of the trend (at least within the realm of I.T. infrastructure/security/management that I am most familiar with) has to do with increasing development of derivatives from other OSS projects, which generally involves adoption of the parent project’s license, in whole or in part, so there’s a function of OSS spawning more OSS.<p>It could be an interesting data analysis project to work out some mechanism for establishing OSS “family trees”.
It’s a cheap, viable, vetted user acquisition model. For most startups it’s about the best CAC you can get without investing in channel development. Close enough to none of them are OSI open source, it’s all source available or open core, laying the cynicism bare.
There's a trending model where they give away the magic for free and make money off services built around it. Often those services can be things like backup and monitoring that contain the lock in.
This is something we have noticed as well in our supply-chain security analysis of Github repos. It could be "build it in the open" philosophy as well that offers complete transparency and security audibility.