I looked through a bit of the companies here and I don’t see any companies that have to retain a quality system and staff to stand behind their products permanently. These models seem to work better when you can just put stuff out there and occasionally pop in to help?
This is not a model that can work with regulated medical products. There is a very significant cost to maintaining static artifacts and I don’t see how you can defensively do that if anyone can access the artifacts?
How many hospitals download the linux kernel and manage their own servers?
I would assume very few. They likely lack the expertise, and pay third party companies to manage the servers, patches, and updates for them... even when the software is open source.
If installing these things required passing FDA trials before you could even do the first install, it’s hard to imagine anyone self funding the regulatory trial and then open sourcing the result.
These businesses you mention are different because you can start getting paid as soon as you build some expertise in how to operationalize the systems.
