Why OSS projects are treated like "products" in .NET OSS

I "own" and participate in several open source .NET projects and have definitely found this to be very true. At the same time, I've found that it varies by project depending on the intended audience of the project itself. Two examples:

One of the projects that I started is a "starter kit" to get some simple user administration screens into a new MVC web app very quickly. This seems to really appeal to newcomers to Asp.Net MVC (most likely because of the starter kit nature of it) and as such I've found that it gets treated much more like a product: lots of requests for me to add new features with VERY few people willing to actually contribute new features themselves. More people download the binaries than download & build the source. [http://github.com/TroyGoode/MembershipStarterKit]

On the other hand I participate in a project that is a C# version of Rails' migrations. This tends to be used by .Net developers who have either exposure to RoR or are otherwise more advanced than your run-of-the-mill drag & drop .Net SharePoint dev. We are actually seeing more contributions than support requests for this project (though it isn't in heavy use either way.) More people download & build the source than download the binaries. [http://github.com/TroyGoode/fluentmigrator]

That said, I suspect that this isn't entirely a symptom of the .Net ecosystem - Rails or Sinatra or Gem certainly get treated as products, right?