It is always interesting to see how many ways a smugly dismissive post about free and open source software can be wrong at the same time. George Siemens writes:
Web 2.0 is killing open source. We too often equate free tools with open tools. Not the case at all. Google offers great software tools to make money and capture market share. Not because they adhere to a higher ideal of a better world. The ideals of open source software (and related concerns, including content) are usurped by ease of software use (hmm, install squirrelmail or use Gmail? Set up WordPress or use Blogger?
First off, as is usual in this genre of posts, Siemens does not recognize or acknowledge the meaning of the word "open source," which was coined for the express purpose of describing a process or methodology that does NOT "adhere to a higher ideal of a better world." The idealistic movement is Free Software. This is like not knowing the difference between someone who does not eat meat to keep his cholesterol down and someone who does not eat meat for religious reasons. It is like writing a post about "connectivism" but calling it "constructivism" or "constructionism."
Of course, neither open source or free software are being killed. They are both healthier than ever. There is simply no evidence to the contrary.
And of course, "Web 2.0" is overwhelmingly built on free software: Linux, Apache, Ruby, Rails, Java, Python, MySQL, etc., etc., etc., so any kind of either/or analysis is fundamentally flawed. But you already know that, don't you?