|
Recent
Articles |
Looking At The State Of Web 2.0 Security
Some of the commentary back on this blog is that the state of Web 2.0 security is in relatively poor shape, and as we have gone through a lot of the code available from larger companies, everyone approaching web...
Diary of a Tired CTO
I did the following things this month. Met fourteen different IT vendors who gave an impressive high impact presentation on how their products and services services can guarantee cost effective, cutting edge, optimized, and seamless, business value in tune with our...
Value Chains, Networks, And Shops
Finally, I have in hand a paper with some theoretical clarity regarding value chains, networks, and shops. That paper is Stabell & Fjeldstad, "Configuring Value for Competitive Advantage: On Chains, Shops, and Networks." (I am not sure how long that link will...
How Process Change Will Save Huge Dough7
Lets assume we are Joe IT guy in the ABC company - an upper middle market company with a few thousand employees, a dozen sites, and all the problems folks like us deal with. We run our transactional production systems and our distributed windows stuff. We have...
Bandwidth Needs Rise As DDoS Attacks Grow In...
Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks are an increasing concern of online organizations. In a DDoS attack, compromised PCs controlled by remote attackers, or botnets, inundate a network with the intent to...
Network Device Monitoring In Essentials 2007
The whole point of System Center Essentails 2007 (aka SCE) is delivery of the base elements of operations and systems management in a single console. It is important to remember, the features you know from big brother Ops Mgr 2007 are still lurking there in the...
Security, HR And Corporate Secrets
Security and HR are more involved in keeping corporate secrets in the world of Wiki's, blogs, YouTube, and MySpace. Computer World is running an interesting piece about corporate data leakage and unregulated...
|
|
|
08.07.07
Truthy Statements About Access To Source Code
 By
Savio Rodrigues
It was a long weekend here in the Toronto and I met up with two friends from university. They told me of a "guaranteed" system for winning at Blackjack that they had discovered.
I won't get into the details of the "strategy". When I used a coin and then a spreadsheet to "prove" that their system didn't work, they kept joking that my proofs didn't seem "truthy enough".
I feel the same way about the notion that: "access to the source code prevents vendor lock-in and is immeasurably important in keeping the OSS vendor focused on the customer".
I don't propose that the above statement is a blatant lie. I only question whether it is an absolute fact. We in the OSS community really provide a superficial discussion on such questions. We accept the answers as obvious truths. I did this also. But my experiences over the past 2 years have compelled me to reconsider. I don't know if my conclusions are correct. But questioning these "truths" seems to paint me as "someone who is oblivious to the world passing by". I should state again for the record that I am a proponent of OSS & Traditional software existing together. I do not believe that OSS will completely take over the software world. Nor do I believe that OSS is a market force to fight. Actually, I wonder if I should paint myself as Dilbert in the comic that Zack wrote about here :-)
I agree that access to source code aids in creating community. I understand that source code access helps customers who may never touch the code because (a developer at) customer ABX has the ability to contribute, thereby benefiting the whole user community. But does this really prevent vendor lock-in or ensure that the vendor is focused on customer needs?
(Note: the following does not apply to projects/products that are implementations of open standards).
If the answer is yes, then I'd propose that the answer is only "truthy enough" when the OSS project is a multi-vendor backed project. Linux, Apache Web Server, Eclipse or Apache Tomcat are great examples of such a projects/communities. I do not feel that yes is a "truthy enough" answer if we are discussing an OSS project backed by a single vendor (which most seem to be these days). I mentioned this to Matt in the comments here. I don't want this statement to be about any particular OSS vendor, so I'll generalize.
I propose that, in most cases, a 3rd party cannot provide the maintenance and future development leadership for OSS software to the same level as the founding vendor of the (single vendor backed) OSS project.
If the project was an implementation of an open standard, then my previous statement would be false. Open standards help reduce vendor lock-in. Open source may help reduce vendor lock-in, but not nearly to the degree that we've led customers to believe.
Meeting customer needs must be a core competency of any software vendor, OSS or not. The notion that OSS vendors are more focused on customers than Traditional vendors is a view that irks me. If this were true, a majority of new software purchases would be OSS based. I've listened to the argument that because the source is out there, OSS vendors must deliver first-rate support and additional offerings or risk losing customers. Sounds great on paper, but in reality, do customers head for the door if they don't receive the customer experience that they expected? Where would they go? In a single vendor backed OSS project, there is no real alternative choice. There is only an allusion of choice (in single vendor backed projects). One option is that the customer can decide not to renew support from a vendor and handle the support in house. However, if the customer has paid for support, they've signaled their intent of being "willing to spend money to save time". Self support does not align with this intent. There may even be a degree of buying support as insurance/CYA, and little that the OSS vendor does would change this purchase decision.
Please disagree and explain why you feel I am incorrect in my conclusions. I'm happy to reconsider my views.
Comments
About the Author:
Savio Rodrigues is a product manager with IBM's WebSphere Software division. He envisions a day when open source and traditional software live in harmony. This site contains Savio's personal views. IBM does not necessarily agree with the views expressed here.
|
