Simon Phipps wrote an article about free software for CNet. In it, he outlines three ways to interpret the "free" in free software:
Phipps talks about why open source software isn't a one-dimensional, anti-corporate communist plot to undermine the US economy. He's certainly got a clue, and describes how developing code in the open leads to a sense of inclusiveness. This is the primary benefit (the one that's been cited for years), not the acquisition cost. This is the model that IBM is following with Eclipse and MySQL is following with its database. It's certainly a different business model that some companies used in the 1980s, but not one that is fundementally flawed.
Phipps also mentions that community building is a crucial aspect of open source development; setting up a company, choosing a license and releasing a tarball doesn't automatically guarantee long term success (or failure). Figuring out how to enfranchise others is a key requirement, and helps identify those who look at open source as parasites, and those who look at open source as symbionts.
