Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 27th Jun 2008 15:13 UTC
Oracle and SUN Sun UK's chief open-source officer, Simon Phipps, has a high-profile role to play as the company is seeking a complete its move to 100 percent open software development. When asked about the criticism over its commitment to open source, Simon re-iterate its commitment with a "Pig and a Chicken" story: "Both animals were asked by the farmer to bring something along for breakfast one morning to show their worth. The chicken turns up with an egg, while the pig turns up with a side of bacon. The farmer looks over the offerings and says: "Well, the chicken has contributed, but the pig is committed."
Thread beginning with comment 320539
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: The New World
by kaiwai on Sun 29th Jun 2008 01:17 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: The New World"
kaiwai
Member since:
2005-07-06

You mean the dealers make very little margins?


Yeap. In Australia there was a big stink made up about the new comer called "Super Cheap Auto's"; alot of people have been suckered into this "must go to an authorised dealer" after purchasing a car. The reality is that they could go anywhere, and the dealers themselves alot of the time would sell a car hardly any mark up - in some cases, a loss, then make up the difference by selling 'authorised servicing and parts' to make up for the lack of profit. Its been going on for years.

Same with petrol service stations. For the average service station owner, less than 2% of their profit comes from selling petrol; most of their profit comes from selling stuff in the store. That is why, for example, if if you go through New Zealand, petrol stations have been virtually turned into supermarkets. The margins for the petrol station owner aren't there.

Back to Sun, I wish people stopped being dishonest by using the term 'giving it away'. Sun isn't giving anything away. The value in software isn't the zeros and ones, it is in the all the things that surround it. Software make a piece of hardware useful, services have to be sold onto of software to make it useful in large companies. To say that software in and of itself is profitable simply ignores how a software business operates.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: The New World
by unclefester on Sun 29th Jun 2008 12:34 in reply to "RE[4]: The New World"
unclefester Member since:
2007-01-13

Small cheap cars are actually loss makers for both the manufacturer and break even at best for dealer. High end models are the only ones that are reasonably profitable. They only make money out of spares and service. A very minor accident can cost thousands of dollars for grossly overpriced spare parts. Most people in Australia get new cars dealer serviced. However any licensed mechanic can service them (much cheaper) without affecting the warranty.

Petrol stations in Australia are actually in the Coca Cola business. They are mostly owned by supermarket chains. They sell petrol only to get people to make impulse buys of overpriced snacks.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[6]: The New World
by kaiwai on Sun 29th Jun 2008 22:19 in reply to "RE[5]: The New World"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

Small cheap cars are actually loss makers for both the manufacturer and break even at best for dealer. High end models are the only ones that are reasonably profitable. They only make money out of spares and service. A very minor accident can cost thousands of dollars for grossly overpriced spare parts. Most people in Australia get new cars dealer serviced. However any licensed mechanic can service them (much cheaper) without affecting the warranty.


Reminds me of the 'Smart Car', IIRC, they've been operating as a subsidiary to who ever owns them, and have never made a profit. Before they were bought out, they made losses - IIRC that was the original reason they were bought out, it was a rescue more than anything else.

Petrol stations in Australia are actually in the Coca Cola business. They are mostly owned by supermarket chains. They sell petrol only to get people to make impulse buys of overpriced snacks.


In New Zealand is is a strange combination. For a while some of the petrol companies owned the service stations - but have since sold them off. There are still a large number, however, which are privately owned - which is why alot of those who do 'drive off's' fail to realise that they're not screwing the big oil companies but the small business owner who is also getting shafted with the high price he has to pay to the oil company.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: The New World
by Kebabbert on Sun 29th Jun 2008 14:51 in reply to "RE[4]: The New World"
Kebabbert Member since:
2007-07-27

"Back to Sun, I wish people stopped being dishonest by using the term 'giving it away'. Sun isn't giving anything away. The value in software isn't the zeros and ones, it is in the all the things that surround it. Software make a piece of hardware useful, services have to be sold onto of software to make it useful in large companies. To say that software in and of itself is profitable simply ignores how a software business operates."


So you mean that SUN is not giving away anything? Let me ask you, which other large company has open sourced their crown jewels and made them free for anyone to download and use? Tell me. Sure, open sourcing SPARC doesnt help the average user, but the rest of their software? SUN aims to open source everything.


Would you rather see all other large companies follow in SUN's footsteps (open sourcing everything that can be opened), or not? Would you rather see SUN buying MySQL and closing it, and charging outrageous money? Would you like that? If large companies bought and closed everything? Is that a good scenario?

Is it just me, or do people exist that doesn't like companies open sourcing everything that can be open sourced? Are there people prefering closed source?

What happens if SUN becomes successfull on this? EVERY company will open up everything that can be opened up! Is that good or not?




PS. Of course I realize SUN is hoping to charge for support and this and that. But a company that has to pay salaries to 30.000 people must get money from somewhere? All I am saying is that I would love if all companies opened up everything. Dont you agree? Should we fight against companies that tries to open source their stuff? If Microsoft tried to open up Windows, NTFS, Office, etc - should we fight that process?

Edited 2008-06-29 14:55 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[6]: The New World
by kaiwai on Sun 29th Jun 2008 22:40 in reply to "RE[5]: The New World"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

So you mean that SUN is not giving away anything? Let me ask you, which other large company has open sourced their crown jewels and made them free for anyone to download and use? Tell me. Sure, open sourcing SPARC doesnt help the average user, but the rest of their software? SUN aims to open source everything.


And there you are being dishonest again; equating the opensourcing of something to giving it away. Opensourcing something, no matter how much you scream and shout, is not 'giving it away'. The value isn't in the 1's and 0's. You have a fixation on the 1's and 0's. The value isn't in that, but what the company can provide to the end user to support those 1's and 0's.

Do you really think that people purchase the software for the pretty case and pretty booklet? they purchase the software to get access to updates and support - hence the reason I don't blame Microsoft when they did the WGA to ensure that only those who purchased a genuine copy obtained updates (although they did go about the wrong way of enforcing it).

You seem to have fixation stuck on the idea of the 'boxed product' when people don't purchase the 'boxed product'. The end user purchases the culmination of different aspects which come in the form of a 'boxed product'. Opensourcing doesn't change that. The only thing it does do is eliminate the idea of piracy.

Again, the value isn't directly in the product itself, the 1's and 0's.

Can it work for every company for every product? I don't know, it has never been tested. I know it does work in the enterprise environment where throwing around a cd with executable code doesn't mean that it'll get adopted. Enterprise customers want more than just 1's and 0's. They want the whole support apparatus behind the product; that is what they're paying for each month/quarter/year etc.

I do think that some things can and should be opensourced. Flash plugin for example, should be opensourced. There is no 'value' in the plugin. The value is derived from the content creating tools that make the plugin useful. To say that the plugin has value is like saying that the television set in your louge room is of higher value than the media being transmitted to it.

There are others that I just couldn't see working, Photoshop for example, the number of customers willing to pay volunteerily for support and updates, I can't see it happening. I'd love to be proven wrong, but given how customers behave regarding Photoshop, I don't think it would be possible.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: The New World
by binarycrusader on Mon 30th Jun 2008 19:51 in reply to "RE[4]: The New World"
binarycrusader Member since:
2005-07-06

The value in software isn't the zeros and ones, it is in the all the things that surround it. Software make a piece of hardware useful, services have to be sold onto of software to make it useful in large companies. To say that software in and of itself is profitable simply ignores how a software business operates.


No, actually, there is a *lot* of value in those bits.

As someone else told me recently, "Hardware without software just generates heat."

If the bits weren't valuable, we wouldn't have holy wars over which license they fall under.

If the bits weren't valuable, companies wouldn't go to court over their usage.

If the bits weren't valuable, the GNU movement wouldn't exist.

Software gives hardware a purpose, and the right bits can make all the difference in the world.

Just ask any technology enthusiast about which bits they'd rather use:

Apple OS X Bits, Linux Bits, or Windows bits.

The bits do matter.

Reply Parent Score: 2