Symbian? By that example, Rio is already there, using Linux as its OS on a number of devices. However, neither Rio nor the partner companies using the Symbian OS created that software from scratch. They're both open platforms chosen by those companies to develop on. This isn't what we're discussing here. We're talking about a company with valuable IP built on whatever OS, deciding to open everything up. I don't see how that will have any meaningful effect on their market share. In some industries and with some partnerships, perhaps (or at least closed licencing), but most sectors have a lot more variables involved. Not Rio nor Creative will topple Apple's market lead, even if they sold their (comparable) players at HALF the cost of an iPod.

As a developer I also don't see the incentive to develop something I will open source as a marketing strategy. I can see plenty of reasons for building on existing open source platforms, but if I'm planning to differentiate my product, the best way to do that is through software. And you don't give that away is you plan to make money. Hardware is complicated if you're not into hardware. But most designs can be replicated quite easily. Now try duplicating the software. That's where we are with the empeg (and Rio's other products). The software, not the hardware, is just about the most valuable asset. DNNA know this. Sun have nothing to lose with OpenOffice. It's just a loss-leader to try and chip away at MS Office. Same goes for Netscape/Mozilla. Just trying to chip a little away at MS while trying to cross-promote other goods/services. Funny that MS practically wiped NS off the face of the Earth with closed-source software just by giving it away.

If I was independently weathly I'd offer DNNA to pay for a contractor to work on new player software. Or pay a couple of other people to develop a new player application. Money isn't a solution for everything, but in this case it seems to be the only solution. Hey, here's $500,000, get to work.

Bruno