Point well taken. But how about (and I have absolutely no idea if these companies you mentioned tried anything liked thir or not), releasing "version lines", so you actively maintain and fix bugs for v1 line, and sell v2. Or maybe as another poster said, which I know would amount to crippleware to some extent, but that's another discussion, have some "freemium" approach in that v1 is the same as v2 bugs-wise, but not feature-wise. So you backport to v1 all the bug fixes you...uhmm..fix.. in v2, except of course those which have something to do with an unsupported feature.
Of course this means solving a host of other problems, considering you have to keep two similar-yet-different codebases, still, I'm interested in what you think of this. Maybe as you say, him alone could not handle it, but may be a small team could?
I mean, there *must* be some way of satisfying both needs of what I would say is a big group of developers, wanting to contribute their grain of salt but not completely ready to embrace full-blown oper-source models. Or are we coming to a point where you basically have no real choice (regarding successful penetration in the market) between going RH style open source or traditional closed source? is there really no other viable way of doing this? (and I ask sincerely, no sacarsm intended)