Monday, August 18th, 2008
Savio posted a blog entry a little while ago that I missed until now (yes, I’m way behind on my RSS feeds). Anyway, after reading my blog post here on Microsoft’s annual report statements regarding risk from open source, Savio went and looked up what other software vendors state in their annual reports regarding potential business risk from open source software. The results are indeed interesting. Check out Savio’s analysis here:
http://saviorodrigues.wordpress.com/2008/08/08/are-vendors-afraid-of-open-source/
Monday, August 18th, 2008
Wow, some great quotes are included in this BusinessWeek article on Red Hat and open source software. It’s great to see Jim taking control at the helm. Certainly I agree with much of his views, however, I also see Red Hat in a business that needs to continue contributing to community efforts. While I know he’s guiding that as well, it does not really come out in these comments.
I definitely agree with Aaron about the bleak future for those open source companies who “don’t get it”. I talk about the blunders I see all the time, but I suspect over the next couple years we’ll finally see them go under. I was less inclined to buy into Aaron’s comments inferring that having a free version hurts the market opportunity for selling. That “free version” running on a server the customer deamed not necessary to support is exactly why Red Hat is in the position it is today.
http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/aug2008/tc20080815_938079.htm
Meantime, life has been rough for many of the companies that have bet their business more specifically on open source.
“Open source is not a get-rich-quick scheme,” says Marten Mickos, the former CEO of MySQL and now a senior vice-president at Sun. “You have to have patience.” He adds that the company was 13 years old when it sold.
Many investors won’t wait that long. Venture capitalists invested $196 million in U.S. open-source software companies last year, after pouring in $265 million in 2006, according to market researcher Dow Jones VentureSource.
…
Whitehurst, [..] is shifting engineers and marketers away from nice-to-have projects toward areas where Red Hat gets paid. He’s pulling resources out of consumer desktop Linux, and he shuttered an online store that sold other companies’ open-source programs. “I took a look at that and said, ‘We’re not eBay,’” he says. “Red Hat is open source, but that doesn’t mean we do everything in open source.”
…
“A pure service business is not particularly defensible,” says Whitehurst. “Some open-source companies have not truly figured that out.” If the open-source movement, now in its second decade, is to realize its promise for vendors and investors, more of its purveyors will need to get the message soon.
Thursday, August 14th, 2008
There’s a great book published over at the Linux Foundation that helps developers who are interested in participating in Linux kernel development and the process for contributing. This is a great resource and is probably one of the most difficult “cultural” and procedural issues for new, aspiring kernel hackers. I think it’s absolutely fantastic the kernel community itself has published a guide on how to participate. This will help significantly as the developer community has scaled already to a very large number of participants.
The LF should publish a PDF version… I’ll send them a suggestion. One other suggestion would be about how a developer should work with their internal legal team to get permission for submitting code. Perhaps we’ll see that in version 2.0.
Oh, and of course it’s free (as in beer) - until O’Reilly buys the rights ;-)
http://ldn.linuxfoundation.org/book/how-participate-linux-community
Thursday, August 7th, 2008
Internally within IBM we get to see a number of great adoption statistics for technologies and IBM products. One that has been increasing over time is the usage of Linux virtualized on Power Systems (e.g. POWER6 processor based servers). These systems were always considered “UNIX servers” and that was true in the old days. Today, with virtualization, how do you count a system that has 30% of its capacity dedicated to Linux partitions and 70% to AIX? How about 90% Linux, 10% AIX? The same trend for adoption of Linux on scalable systems is true for Mainframes as well. These systems offer customers a significant amount of flexibility to match workloads and applications to the best hardware without disrupting the OS, tools, etc.
Every now and then IBMers know we’ve clearly done something the competition is unlikely to ever catch up to even if we let them know it’s working. The numbers below speak for themselves. It takes commitment to drive change. To use a poker reference, if you know the odds are in your favor, go all in pre-flop or someone without the odds will potentially take you out on the river card. If Sun had a real Linux strategy, this could be Linux on UltraSPARC Tx. If HP had a real processor strategy, this could be Linux on Superdome.
http://www.vnunet.com/vnunet/news/2223362/virtualisation-booming-ibm
The company is reporting a threefold increase in the number of virtualised Power Systems servers sold. Sixty four per cent of Big Blue’s customers opted for a virtualised Linux setup on the new servers, compared to just 21 per cent a year ago.
“Even I was stunned by the uptake,” admitted Scott Handy, IBM’s vice president of Power Systems.
Monday, August 4th, 2008
About time somebody figured out a way around the laptop removal requirements:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/05/business/05road.html?_r=1&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&oref=slogin
Monday, August 4th, 2008
Are others seeing a sudden drastic rise in WordPress spam comments and users in recent days? Luckily Akismet is catching most of the comments, but SABRE is not so effective at reducing spam user registrations.
Monday, August 4th, 2008
You need look no further than the most recent Microsoft annual report to understand that Microsoft still does not “get open source”.
Let’s start with page 12, “Item 1A: Risk Factors”, first risk section:
Challenges to our business model may reduce our revenues and operating margins. Our business model has been based upon customers paying a fee to license software that we develop and distribute. Under this license-based software model, software developers bear the costs of converting original ideas into software products through investments in research and development, offsetting these costs with the revenue received from the distribution of their products. Certain “open source” software business models challenge our license-based software model. Open source commonly refers to software whose source code is subject to a license allowing it to be modified, combined with other software and redistributed, subject to restrictions set forth in the license. A number of commercial firms compete with us using an open source business model by modifying and then distributing open source software to end users at nominal cost and earning revenue on complementary services and products. These firms do not bear the full costs of research and development for the software. Some of these firms may build upon Microsoft ideas that we provide to them free or at low royalties in connection with our interoperability initiatives. To the extent open source software gains increasing market acceptance, our sales, revenue and operating margins may decline.
No where in this section covering “open source” software does Microsoft hint at or acknowledge the possibility that Microsoft could leverage this model to strengthen its developer community, offer attractive licensing into emerging markets, leverage community based development to lead in web server standards, etc.
This is more interesting, because the entire section lacks anything that Microsoft may do to counter, compete with, or embrace the risk it identified: open source software.
Now take a look at the other paragraphs in this section 1A Risk Factors of the annual report. ALL of the other items called out as significant risks have something at the end of their paragaphs - what Microsoft will do about them. For instance:
Advertising Subscription Business Models: “We are devoting significant resources toward developing our own competing software plus services strategies. It is uncertain whether these strategies will be successful.”
Platform based ecosystems (vertically integrated model): “We also offer vertically-integrated hardware and software products;…”
Piracy: “Throughout the world, we actively educate consumers about the benefits of licensing genuine products and obtaining indemnification benefits for intellectual property risks, and we educate lawmakers about the advantages of a business climate where intellectual property rights are protected.”
And it goes on and on… but where is this wonderfully open painting of Microsoft collaborating with the open source community? Will Microsoft ever embrace it enough to have a chance of extending it?
To be continued…
Thursday, July 31st, 2008
I couldn’t help but find myself perplexed when I got an email on my iPhone yesterday from a well known figure in the Linux world. He (and subsequently I) were baffled that Sun must be combing through existing LAMP users for new references - LinkedIn uses LAMP. Well call me shocked… don’t 90% of the web companies out there run LAMP? (excluding those Microsoft has bought) I’m guessing the “new news” is that Sun signed up LinkedIn for a MySQL support contract for the first time, but are we going through a second LAMP hype cycle?
http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/080728/20080728005247.html?.v=1
Friday, July 25th, 2008
It looks like the issues of patenting software are not limited to just the US ;-) Of course we knew this already, but it’s interesting to see that the India-based systems integrators now want to use patents to “protect” their ability to create software product businesses. Of course Red Hat is taking an alternative position. Those favoring the extension of the interpretation are arguing that that software makes the hardware novel - as opposed to the software being novel itself. That’s basically akin to saying if I have a patentable product X and an unpatentable product Y, I can protect Y by gluing it to X - good luck.
Infosys took it a step further: “Infosys, which sent a separate representation, goes even further—it says even the source code should get a patent.”
It would appear the Indian IT leaders have a lot to learn about open innovation and the bottlenecks and friction software patents create. Looking at this short term will lead to many long term issues other markets are still not sure how to handle.
http://www.financialexpress.com/news/Infy-TCS-lock-horns-with-Red-Hat-over-IT-patent/340200/0
IT majors like Infosys Technologies Ltd and Tata Consultancy Services (TCS) are opposing the open-source community’s demand that the government drop a clause in the draft patent examination manual as it gives scope for software patenting under the Indian Patent Act of 2003.
The dispute has been sparked by the draft manual that will guide patent examiners in their interpretation of the Indian Patent (Amendment) Act for software. Section 3(K) of the Act clearly says: “A mathematical or business method or a computer programme per se or algorithms are not patentable.” But the draft examination manual gives scope for patent examiners to grant patents where none is allowed for software under the law. Even the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce & Industry (Ficci), representing the software associations and the law firms, arguing that a strong intellectual property regime in India would give the Indian software industry the impetus to evolve into product-related research & development model.
Thursday, July 24th, 2008
I just went to download the iPhone SDK early this morning and realized they only have a Mac OS X version. No Linux or Windows version - how nice. I guess I should have expected that. Not having a Mac, I’m obviously not going to be test writing any apps.
I wonder if this has anything to do with the recent uptick in Mac sales.
Wednesday, July 23rd, 2008
The SFLC continues to enforce the GPL on behalf of the BusyBox developers, this time against Extreme Networks. As usual, a lawsuit is filed after trying to work with the defendants to remedy the situation first.
The Software Freedom Law Center (SFLC) today announced that it has filed a copyright infringement lawsuit against Extreme Networks, Inc. on behalf of its clients, two principal developers of BusyBox, alleging violation of the GNU General Public License (GPL).
“We attempted to negotiate with Extreme Networks, but they ultimately ignored us,” said Aaron Williamson, SFLC Counsel. “Like too many other companies we have contacted, they treated GPL compliance as an afterthought. That is not acceptable to us or our clients.”
Tuesday, July 22nd, 2008
WordPress for iPhone is here. I just tested it and there appears to be some bugs still. When I setup my blog on the iPhone app, it auto inserted a couple of blank posts that did not have anything in them. Hopefully we’ll see an update soon ;-)
One bigger issue is that the iPhone still does not have copy/paste support.
Introducing the first Open Source app that lets you write posts, upload photos, and edit your WordPress blog from your iPhone or iPod Touch. With support for both WordPress.com and self-hosted WordPress (2.5.1 or higher), users of all experience levels can get going in seconds. Download it now!
Wednesday, July 16th, 2008
I still need to update to v2.6, but it’s officially here. There are a host of cool new features including Gears-based acceleration.
I also noticed this link indicating an upcoming iPhone application for easier use of WordPress.
Good news on all WordPress fronts.
Wednesday, July 16th, 2008
I noticed this Forbes article and have to add my 1 big disappointment. Unlike a Blackberry and many other internet-capable devices, you cannot use the iPhone as a modem or in a tethered mode to access the internet from a laptop. I am baffled that this is not a huge selling point. I can only imagine that AT&T doesn’t want the bandwidth, but I find it unacceptable.
Personally I don’t find multimedia messaging to be an issue. I also don’t care about voice dialing. But if I were to add a 9th disappointment to the list it would be iTunes. As I’ve documented in prior posts, I cannot stand iTunes. Add in that I have to pay for a song twice to add any ringtone to my phone, and I hate iTunes twice as much as before.
Monday, July 14th, 2008
I actually haven’t been using Gentoo at all recently. It’s on an older laptop that just doesn’t keep up with all the compiling. However I have a very fast AMD64 desktop at home just waiting to try out the latest Gentoo. I was also waiting for the latest kernel to come out b/c there are some KVM, webcam, and other driver updates I’m interested in taking advantage of. In other news, 2.6.26 adds KVM support for S/390 (IBM Mainframe), PPC (IBM Power) and Itanium processors.
I also noticed KGDB (kernel debugger) supports x86 and SPARC right now - SPARC? Hmm…
You can read more about the new kernel features here: http://kernelnewbies.org/Linux_2_6_26
And you can get the latest Gentoo LiveCD over here: http://www.gentoo.org/main/en/where.xml
Monday, July 14th, 2008
IBMers can get a significant discount off their AT&T wireless plans. I just got an iPhone and switched to AT&T wireless from Verizon. It’s worth the effort to sign up.
http://wireless.att.com/discounts
Monday, July 14th, 2008
I found this website particularly helpful figuring out some of the hidden tricks to the new iPhone.
http://www.apple.com/iphone/tips/
Friday, July 11th, 2008
Has mismanagement finally done Sun in? Unfortunately I have to wonder if Jonathan has done irreparable damage. I think a lack of a real strategy to embrace Linux has led to this problem… Schwartz tried to turn Sun into an “open source company” but what does that really mean? How many companies have taken a similar approach and generated shareholder value? The best “open source companies” know better, they know how to manage and really use open source effectively to support their strategy - they don’t make it the strategy.
I just shake my head when Jonathan compares Sun to Google - it’s not true, not even within a mile. Google has a proprietary product in its search business - it’s built on open source, yes. But open source supports their strategy - to sell ads. If Sun “opened” Solaris correctly and at the right time, perhaps it could have done well. But you have to look for a strategy that works today, not a few years ago.
A strategy starts with what will customers buy from you. Refusing to accept that customers want fast, efficient servers running business solutions on Linux and Windows (note, not “open source”) could be cited as a cause of the downfall, or sunset if you allow me a pun.
I feel for the employees at Sun that will lose out first, before management. There are a lot of great people with great talent there and I can only hope the upper management is replaced and Sun as a company gets set straight by a professional with actual business execution ability. I would like to continue seeing Sun in the tech industry, perhaps not as the vendor we know it today. Maybe I’m just nostalgic, but too many great technologies have come from Sun employees in an innovative environment to just go the way of DEC or SGI.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/07/10/sun_under_gun/
http://blogs.barrons.com/techtraderdaily/2008/07/09/sun-micro-could-ceo-schwartz-be-on-his-way-out/
Thoughts? Am I all alone on this?
Tuesday, July 8th, 2008
I’m honestly a bit surprised at how much demand there seems to be for the 3G iPhone. I can’t tell if it’s just nonsense that people are already lining up at the Apple flagship store in NYC or if there really will be such high demand in the US. Everyone I know that I’d consider an “early adopter” (except myself) already has an iPhone. If it were not for my Verizon contract, you could put me in that group. Is there really that much demand to upgrade to 3G? I consider lining up at a store days before the launch a publicity stunt more than an indicator of demand.
Now abroad I can understand. This will be the first time many markets get to use the iPhone at home so I can imagine the strong demand. O2 in the UK seems to be experience an iPhone customer craze. Below is a quote regarding the preorder launch… 13,000 iPhones per second…
“Demand was at 13,000 orders per second,” said Shurrock. “Frankly, we have to admit we just weren’t prepared for this unprecedented level of demand. No website is.”
http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2008/07/08/apple_iphone_o2_email/
I will get an iPhone 3G - it’s impossible to avoid now that my contract expires in 30 days. I just wonder how long I’ll have to wait for stock to show up. I wonder how many new customers AT&T will land from its exclusive arrangement with Apple. Once the momemtum picks up with the lower price point, this could be the iPod 2.0 craze - all to AT&T’s benefit.
Thursday, July 3rd, 2008
The privacy issues underlying this discovery request are troubling. What’s next? Will Viacom now send every ISP a discovery request for the people whose DSL/cable IP address shows in the log? Will Viacom then take a page out of the RIAA’s book and start suing home owners? Will the RIAA suddenly see this as a great way to collect royalties on music embedded in videos?
I may have to stop watching YouTube video… but Viacom… well unfortunately they own Comedy Central and I won’t give that up.
I can’t believe that the great minds in this country working in the entertainment industry cannot sit down and come up with a better solution for IP protection. If not, I fear that IP protection will become a negative to the mass public.
Subscribe to RSS/Atom Feed
