People (generally) open up things that aren't fundamental to their core. Google opens a lot of software, but very little about the actual core that runs everything, because those instant results are a key differentiator.
FB opens their hardware, because the software is really quite meaningly to their core. The thing that matters to them is the social graph, which they guard jealously.
If you can make your competitor's core a commodity, you've gone a long way towards reducing their effectiveness as your competitor.
> If you can make your competitor's core a commodity, you've gone a long way towards reducing their effectiveness as your competitor.
I've been considering this idea a lot and I think it explains the motivations of a surprising number of technical advancements. The masses get better free/open stuff as new competitors come along and enlist the community to help undermine the incumbents.
FB opens their hardware, because the software is really quite meaningly to their core. The thing that matters to them is the social graph, which they guard jealously.
If you can make your competitor's core a commodity, you've gone a long way towards reducing their effectiveness as your competitor.