The variety of open source offerings – from application servers and databases to security and content management – illustrate the community’s commitment to meet business needs. We’re ready to take the next step. But, first, there are a few things we’d like to see from you, the open source community, before free software takes on a higher profile in big IT departments.
who are you for telling “I want that and that …”
If you want something, get your fingers out of your ass and code.
FOSS a free, so developpers works because they like it, and now you want to impose them *your* needs.
If so, they will became free developpers for big enterprise …
Most likely written by IBM executives who believe they’re not getting enough free labor.
But pretty stupid “wish list”. If these guys are really IT executives then they shouldn’t even care about open source except at the OS level. Real executives want solutions.
Thanks for zealot stock answer #4 (If it sucks, why not do it youself?)
Closely related to #5 (Don’t like it? Fork it, modify it, release it – the “fork off” answer)
Usually found in close proximity to #2 (OSS programmers do it for their benefit, not yours. How dare you try to impose your requirements on them you facist?)
Best counter tactic:
If it sucks, no-one will consider it for deployment in a real-life commercial environment. If it really sucks, not even students will use it just because it is “free”.
My theory:
It sucks because FLOSS developers do it for free, therefore have no economic incentive to get it right. “respect”, “recognition” and “self acutalisation” may be the currency of the insulated FLOSS economy, but they do not pay the mortgage – FLOSS programmers take no risk other than riducule in their efforts.
From the article, “But, first, there are a few things we’d like to see from you…”
Open letter? We? Please. I for one am getting tired of “open letters.” They are nothing more than wish lists made by individuals unwilling or unable to create their own software. Open letters are worthless unless written by someone who has earned respect within a community.
Who wrote this letter? It is signed by “Corporate IT executives.” Right. IF some of these executives actually drafted this letter, then they need to get a grip. IF a member of the Open Source community of developers feels like addressing your wish list, then she will. If not, then you better learn to do it _yourself_, because that is what this scene is all about.
Freedom from being a stooge for some PHB, or some faceless corp, is why we do this – not so that we can be your lackeys.
Why do we never see open letters to companies like Microsoft? Why do these corporate execs expect special treatment from FLOSS that don’t get from the proprietary world?
If developers just meet their own needs, at least no one should scream if somebody else does not use it.
Why do we never see open letters to companies like Microsoft? Why do these corporate execs expect special treatment from FLOSS that don’t get from the proprietary world?
That’s because companies like Oracle and Adobe (to name a few) conduct marketresearch and directly approach their customers. In other words, they do get ‘special’ treatment from closed-source companies.
“If it sucks, no-one will consider it for deployment in a real-life commercial environment. If it really sucks, not even students will use it just because it is “free”.”
Pretty sad don’t you think that the average leader of tomorrow sees nothing wrong with choosing expedience over free thought?
“It sucks because FLOSS developers do it for free, therefore have no economic incentive to get it right. “respect”, “recognition” and “self acutalisation” may be the currency of the insulated FLOSS economy, but they do not pay the mortgage – FLOSS programmers take no risk other than riducule in their efforts.”
Are you actually saying (and your text does say this), that the only useful incentive to do anything is cash? Integrity, love, hate, patriotism, desire for respect – none of these have ever been the catalyst for human acheivement? If you believe this…you are wrong.
Dear Corporate IT executives,
you seem to have a slight missconception. Open Source (in general) was not solely developed for your benefit. It also never will be – unless you start to employ the developers.
I highly doubt that open source developers spending their free time in front of their computer writing software lay awake at night wondering when you, dear executives, finally take the child of their work into use.
(Of course some may have formed companies around their project, in which case, they should better lay awake thinking about it, but that is a different story 😉
So here are some random ideas how to improve the points that were mentioned:
More enterprise-class support: You guys are businessman, you know your way around money and finance. If you find a project that has no enterprise-class support, find people who are willing to support you and underwrite a long term contract. Those people could be for example people who work on that project. Enable them to start a company. You guys know how!
Better documentation: Well, if the documentation is bad it will bite the project in due time anyways, but there is something you can do. Talk to people in the project and offer them a part time job to work on the documentation. It might not be fun and games, but money can be a very efficient motivator for those jobs.
Access to more platforms: If you need it on windows, do it yourself! It is open source, nobody is keeping you! Don’t just sit there whining. You do not know how you say? Well, I am sure there are quite a few open source developers who might touch windows – if you ask them nicely (and hand them their salary). Open source does not magically appear. Someone has to write it, and if you want it – do it yourself.
A commitment to stay open: Well, It is open source? If you do not like the possibility of closing a project, use a license which makes it impossible. Use the GPL for example. But I see that your main point is not the openness – it is standardization. I agree standards are important. By the way, you do not have to sit and hope. Go to the projects. Tell them that you really like standards and that you might pay someone to implement those standards. Work with OASIS, or freedesktop. Just go out and do something instead of hoping someone is going to do it for you!
A focus on the end user: This point is very important. And sadly has nothing to do with you! You, as coporate IT executives, are mostly never the user; you are at most the customer. This is true for closed as for open source. You make the decisions and people have to live with them. What can you do to help? Simple: Pay usability labs to help evaluate open source software. Tell the people who work with the open source project to start talking with the developers. Hire a developer of the project to act as an intermediary. Sure developers like talking to each other better than talking to “people”. Motivate them to listen!
I found one comment very interesting: “There is a lingering feeling in parts of the community that commercialization isn’t necessarily a good thing.”
Yes, I have seen this sentiment, and must admit that I even share it. But what I mean with commercialization is, treating an open source project as you would a suplier. It doesn’t work that way. Get involved with projects, but do not expect to be the centre of its universe. You are one of many. If the project doesn’t move in the direction you intended? Fork it, pay people to develop your branch, and be happy.
This concludes my open answer. I just wanted to bring across one point: Dear cooperations, do not stand around and wait for OS projects to come around. Participate!
Employ OS developers or help them create companies around their projects. I promise you, that will work much better than writing open letters.
Sincerely
Camel
So if I publish an open letter to a closed source software developer, I can expect a serious response? I can expect changes to be implemented that I’ve asked for?
There is no such thing as “Open Source Community”. And there is no such thing as “Corporate IT executives”. There are many people with different goals and opinions. This letter is nonsense – it’s a letter from nobody to no one.
“Are you actually saying (and your text does say this), that the only useful incentive to do anything is cash? Integrity, love, hate, patriotism, desire for respect – none of these have ever been the catalyst for human acheivement? If you believe this…you are wrong. ”
They may be the catalyst behind many a human achievement (both of the good sort and bad) but they are not the catalyst for producing, say, a usable project management tool, enterprise strength DBMS, or even a consistent set of desktop/productivity apps that I can copy and paste text between at will.
It is clear that FLOSS programmers are aiming at the top level of Maslow’s heriachy of needs. What is not clear is whether they can ignore the more basic needs because they are comfortably off (by being rewarded for their effort), or more likley those needs are being met by their parents who let them use the basement.
You’re exactly right. There is no all ecompassing “community”. It looks like these “IT executives” are drinking the koolaid too.
Good post.
” more likley those needs are being met by their parents who let them use the basement.”
Ah, so it’s more important to you to re-hash OSS myths than make an actual point. Good that you cleared that up. For a minute there we thought you actually had something to say.
How about an open letter to mlb2000 that makes demands but offers no rewards? I wonder how he would respond to that. Furthermore, the conjecture is completely false: FOSS *is* used in corporate environments and sanctioned by many an IT Manager (“future leader”, in mlb2000’s words — ha ha ha). Just because Joe Blowhard submitted an oh-so-inflamatory “article” to a random IT magazine doesn’t mean it represents the facts. If you aren’t interested in FOSS, don’t participate. No one is forcing you to use the stuff, let alone comment on it.
Don’t get your panties all in a bunch because of this letter.
Here’s a newsflash, it’s an editorial disguising as a letter.
It’s not as if company execs actually got together to write this letter to the open source comunity, it’s simply an editorial about where the author thinks open source software needs to improve to be even more widely adopted in the bussiness world than it is now.
Now you may agree with him on some points, or you may not agree with him on some points, but don’t get all excited because it calls itself a letter.
I was trying to make serious point, though my humour does not appear to travel well.
How are FLOSS programmers making a living? Are they all so luckly that there basic living needs of food, shelter, companship are all being met and they can give away their effort for nothing indefinatly (or is FLOSS programming a substitute for the companship?). Are those needs being met by themselves or provided by others?
What happens when the bank refuses your offer to pay the mortgage with respect? How old are they – what happens when their viewpoint changes with age and maturity (the old “hippy who becomes bank manager scenario”)? Who will pay their pensions and healthcare if they continue to give it away for no commercial gain? Where are new wealth and exports generated?
All myths have a grain of truth…
It’s a simple business proposition.
Open source that doesn’t exist isn’t there for the same reason closed source doesn’t exist; nobody wanted it (or didn’t want it for the price).
If you want it, you have something ‘we’ want; a budget. Fork some of it over for a custom project and we will be glad to fork over the source code as OSS.
It’s not a mystery. You don’t have to consult the whole mysterious “open source community”…just hire folks and pay them to do exactly what you want. If you don’t want to pay the full amount, start talking to other companies to see if they will.
Why do people make this so difficult?
“”future leader”, in mlb2000’s words”
Erm, not mine.
Yes, some organisations do use FLOSS. Most do not. They must have been aware of the oppertunity for some time now, but have chosen to pass it up for some reason. For some that reason would be blinkered lack of consideration for a “new way of computing”, for others a sensible and rational consideration of the strategic fit of FLOSS to the attaintment of their corporate goals.
“Yes, some organisations do use FLOSS. Most do not.”
Is that a fact?
Can you show me the statistic proving that?
And how do you explain the great increases in market share of open source software then?
Warning, Selfish and biased speach inside
I was trying to make serious point, though my humour does not appear to travel well.
Yes, and this is the only point you got it right. Lack of humor I mean.
How are FLOSS programmers making a living? Are they all so luckly that there basic living needs of food, shelter, companship are all being met and they can give away their effort for nothing indefinatly (or is FLOSS programming a substitute for the companship?). Are those needs being met by themselves or provided by others?
It has nothing to do with OSS or closed source. If you’re capable to make bussines you do. If not, well….
Some code for fun, some code for money. And some of us actualy try to walk the best road between the sides and make money with OSS. Explanation: I search for a missing project (mostly server services), find the funds and start coding. Sometimes when funds are not to be found and the problem is interesting enough, I start doing it for my personal fun. btw, I never lack money, so OSS bussines can be good.
What happens when the bank refuses your offer to pay the mortgage with respect? How old are they – what happens when their viewpoint changes with age and maturity (the old “hippy who becomes bank manager scenario”)? Who will pay their pensions and healthcare if they continue to give it away for no commercial gain? Where are new wealth and exports generated?
Well, better start working then. But no one says that you have to code for your life. Me for example I actualy enjoy drawing, but I wouldn’t do it for money (again). I draw for fun and as such my art is to be treated. Although quality of results depends on the finishing and atistic level artist is involved in. In your words, I should stop drawing because there is no money inside for me.
All myths have a grain of truth…
And at the end they are called myths for a reason
@Article
Well, all I can say,… IT IS STUPID, AROGANT and probably written by some IMBECIL who wanted to make a statement about the thing he knows nothing about.
Quick Article Translation
We don’t wanna pay, but we fell threatened because for now we have to pay all our software. Dear OSS coder, be a good boys, a make us first class enterprise software (and please be carefull about all our quirks and wishes) so we can make more millions.
If you won’t do that, we will still have to pay for the software we need.
Epilogue
If this letter would be at least a bit sincere,… It would not be an open letter to OSS but to bussines community that wants to use OSS.
1.How to start improving and helping OSS
2.How to centralise the development they need (so that thir resources are better organised when task is similiar).
3.How to fund OSS for their personal quirks to get done sooner.
I’m afraid not, all of my clients insist on NDAs.
I can gurantee that the financial sector in the UK has next to 0% use of FLOSS outside of occasional embedded systems, and even these are stongly resisted.
One of the main reasons for this is the massive amount of of bespoke or specialist applications in use in any large organisation (say 5,000+ employees) that run on Windows or propriety Unix, other reasons include the skill base of existing staff (you do not retrain 500+ IT specialists just because the product is “free”, and upgrades form NT to XP don’t count as this is cleary an incremental effort on acquired and applied knowledge), skill base of end-users, ability to access and use old data, ability to exchange data with other parties, bascially – the ability to continue and grow your operation.
“I should stop drawing because there is no money inside for me. ”
No, but I don’t expect you to start crying if I say I don’t like it, nor if I ask you when it will be finished. I’m not saying that is “you”, but it certainly is the behaivour shown by some on this post.
I absolutely agree with this. The things that the “IT EXECS” were asking for were – BUSINESSES THAT SUPPORT AND DEVELOP OPEN SOURCE. What does the community have to do with that? We want to fix things and get things done and have some fun and write some cool code. If they ask us, we’ll be happy to do contract work for them, duh.
If you like some open project and you want help adding to it, you just find the author’s email in the README or the INSTALL or the Makefile or main.c. Most times they are happy to talk to you. Of course if it’s a big project like the Linux kernel or Apache there are lots of people to talk to.
Where’s the mystery?
Most big projects have a page with links to businesses that offer pay support. Have these IT execs ever gotten beyond hypeville and actually pointed their spyware-laden IE at the project’s home page? NO.
NETWORK WORLD is as bad as all of the other FOO WORLD magazines. Hype for knuckleheads who don’t understand things.
But it sure is fun to whoop up on those open source GNU hippies, YEE HAW.
The article’s guy doesn’t want free (as freedom) software. He wants freewares or proprietary software, because he doesn’t care about source code or programming. Linux or other free softwares are not adequate for persons with ideas like these.
“How are FLOSS programmers making a living? Are they all so luckly that there basic living needs of food, shelter, companship are all being met and they can give away their effort for nothing indefinatly (or is FLOSS programming a substitute for the companship?). Are those needs being met by themselves or provided by others?”
1)Are you not aware that many OSS programmers are paid for their work by corporations like Sun, etc.?
2)Did the fact that the developers who work on Firefox not get a regular salary prevent it from being a better browser than IE?
As I said, you’re not making any new points here, just reiterating what countless doubters have said before you. The only thing you forgot to do is call FLOSS developers “communists”.
What is not clear is whether they can ignore the more basic needs because they are comfortably off (by being rewarded for their effort), or more likley those needs are being met by their parents who let them use the basement.
Do you really expect to be taken seriously when you indulge in such tired old clichés?
Seriously, does anyone still believe the “programmer living in his parents’ basement” stereotype anymore? Most FLOSS developers are professionnals programmers who are either paid for their FLOSS development, or do it in their spare time from their main job.
It would be better if you had an actual argument instead of the usual ad hominem attacks.
As for the article, I think it’s interesting and raises a couple of good points (documentation and focus on the end users being one), however – as typical of the occidental corporate culture – it is very one-sided. We know what the business community would like from the FLOSS one, but we don’t get any idea of what the FLOSS community would get in return. The privilege of having their apps being used by corporations? That’s a bit thin…
I think what the open letter is asking for is reasonable, but at the same time there needs to be the sense that corporations will participate as well (which is already happening with companies such as IBM, HP and – to a certain extent – Sun, which contribute back to the community and finance important OSS projects.)
A good example of this is Google: they made tons of money with FLOSS, and they are now giving back to the community with their Summer of Code event. That’s a creative way to give back, and everybody wins!
The problem with many corporations is that they are focussed on the short-term, and don’t understand that they can increase their bottom line if they support medium- and long-term projects. That’s not unique to IT, however, and is unfortunately not likely to change anytime soon…
The only thing you forgot to do is call FLOSS developers “communists”.
Nope, your getting me wrong there. Just as the church should have no business in the state, ideaologies should have no business in programming. I’m purely secular (and capitalist, like my clients) in my outlook.
“I’m afraid not, all of my clients insist on NDAs.
I can gurantee that the financial sector in the UK has next to 0% use of FLOSS outside of occasional embedded systems, and even these are stongly resisted.”
Oh, I’m sorry, I didn’t realize I was talking to such an important person.
Now I’m only wondering why IBM, HP, etc. falsely claim to make billions worth of bussiness with open source and why all studies claim that linux is the fastest growing OS?
Strange, maybe they should have asked a real professional like you before making these false claims.
I’m afraid not, all of my clients insist on NDAs.
Even if they weren’t, your personal experience cannot be substituted for real scientific research. The sample bias would just be too high.
As it happens, most studies that I’ve heard about in the past couple of years tend to indicate that, on the contrary, most companies use FLOSS products in some parts of their IT infrastructure. Do they only use FLOSS? Of course not. But chances are they are using FLOSS somewhere, be it on their web servers (Apache being the market leader by a margin of 3:1), mail servers, databases, compilation tools (which we do), or even for small “helper” apps.
And that’s not counting the BSD code which was modified and then closed by proprietary software companies…
I can gurantee that the financial sector in the UK has next to 0% use of FLOSS outside of occasional embedded systems, and even these are stongly resisted
Funny, FLOSS is used quite a lot in the US financial sector. Just google the words “Wall Street” and “Linux” and you’ll be surprised at the amounts of hits you get.
And, as far as I know, the American financial sector is much larger and stronger than the UK one…
Excuse us, but you aren’t getting enough support from Microsoft?
Gee, I wonder why.
Maybe if you corp execs would “lose your religion” and get rid of Microsoft, you might find out you don’t need OSS to “support more platforms.”
Given that most OSS runs on Linux and Linux runs on more ACTUAL platforms than Windows ever will, I can’t take this request seriously.
The real problem is corporations have built in-house and purchased third party software which is locked in to a proprietary, expensive, insecure, unreliable operating system. Correct that mistake before you start asking OSS to support that operating system.
OSS is not in the business of correcting your technology implementation errors.
Just as the church should have no business in the state, ideaologies should have no business in programming.
That would be true if software did not have political or social impacts. Unfortunately it does, as access to information becomes an important part of our lives, and IT development threatens to widen the gap between haves and have-nots.
I’m purely secular (and capitalist, like my clients) in my outlook.
Capitalism does not exist in 21st-century industrialized nations such as the U.S. and the UK. In fact, pure capitalism died in 1929 – Keynesian economics has ruled the industrialized west since. Not to mention that if you don’t actually have a lot of capital to start businesses (or, in the modern days, you’re not such a large stockholder that the majority of your income comes from investments), you can’t even call yourself a capitalist. A capitalist is someone who owns a large amount of capital, not someone who agrees with free market ideologies – so many people play at being capitalists, but are really only high-paid employees.
Personal attack.
“Oh, I’m sorry, I didn’t realize I was talking to such an important person. ”
That’s OK. You weren’t to know.
And again, posing as attack on my countries financial position.
“Funny, FLOSS is used quite a lot in the US financial sector. Just google the words “Wall Street” and “Linux” and you’ll be surprised at the amounts of hits you get. And, as far as I know, the American financial sector is much larger and stronger than the UK one…”
So? When I google “USA” and “debt” or “trade decfit” I see that USA in a much worse position than the UK. Or “USA” and “global warming”? Proving what – about as much as the above statement.
Boooooooooooooohhhhhhhhhhhhhoooooooooooo.
How about stoping your whining and instead addressing the points that have been raised?
Oh and as you didn’t notice, I wasn’t attacking you, I was making fun of you. ;-D
Sorry for not rebutting your replies word for word. I find that the larger picture gets lost quickly that way.
“Oh and as you didn’t notice, I wasn’t attacking you, I was making fun of you. ;-D”
Me too (well, some points anyway). This has actully been one of the more “grown up” discussions I’ve seen here – must of got too boring for some…
Anyway – I’m off to bed now. Here in the UK, daylight runs out at around 23:00
Good night.
I’m still sorry that you couldn’t shed a light on the obvious gap between your insider knowledge and the claims by IBM, HP and every market research study out there, though.
Would you like fries with that, mister Corporate IT executive?
The sheer arrogance!
How about a little “THANK YOU” to all the developers working on the software you need instead of a “WE WANT MORE”?
How about employing a few of those people who are working on their free time to bring you quality software, so that they actually have an incentive to work on the “boring” parts which you claim to need so much, like support, stability and documentation?
How about asking the industry and not the community to provide open software support?
How about USING LINUX instead of asking people to support Microsoft, WHICH MOST OF THEM DON’T WANT TO?
Free software programmers are people who work on their free time to do things they like. Their time, their rules. If it brings you quality software you can use in your companies, so much the better. But please don’t go around criticising and demanding more without offering anything in return. These people don’t have to do what you want, they’re not your employees.
When will the industry start seeing free software developers as talented people bringing you a gift rather than free labour that will do what you want?
At least some companies get it right… And what would you know, some of them are actually at the top.
Sheesh, so much backlash at a simple list of suggestions.
(rumination over the obvious follows)
I think a thing about (non-commercial) FLOSS is that there’s no intrinsic motivation for devs to go out of their way to please end-users. Commercial producers must expand their user base for survival and profit, but (non-commercial) FLOSS devs gain nothing from expanding their user base, beyond a certain point.
(Insert conclusion here)
>Most FLOSS developers are professionnals programmers who are either paid for their FLOSS development, or do it in their spare time from their main job.
Read this and try to spin it: http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1833612,00.asp
Quote: If people don’t start supporting open-source software with more than just lip service… well, there will be a lot more leading open-source programmers heading to proprietary companies.
More enterprise-class support
You have to pay for that. It exists independently of the people who create the software.
Better documentation
Well, yes. Though that could be said of virtually all software. You can always pay for that too.
A sense of stability
Sorry. You cannot have a stable, cutting edge FOSS project unless you provide the financial backing. There are plenty of very stable and powerful FOSS projects but it takes time to prove stability. No software start-up business is any more stable.
Access to [Windows]
Well, yes. I have to use Windows from time to time and I’d love to have KDE rather than Windows Explorer. Good point.
A commitment to stay open
Err, what the heck are you talking about? If they go closed source then, by definition, they would no longer have the “problems” of an open source project. Many projects make this commitment and the GPL guarantees it. This is really just a re-statement of your stability point.
A focus on the end user
This varies greatly between projects. It’s hardly a complaint you can level against Mozilla for example. Indeed, the most successful projects are those that focus on the end-user. Fair point.
Stupid article with some good points in it.
Ignoring the format of the article, as it just seems to wind people up, but in the content and surrounding thoughts there is a fair point to be dredged out.
There are many free (as in speech) software advocates who strongly believe that all software should be free and we shouldn’t run any non-free software. This article is really about the issue of the wider adoption of free software. It is, in effect, saying, “If you want us to adopt your ideologies and use free software, you’re going to have to meet us halfway.”
If you’re a big corporate running hundreds of workstations, you aren’t going to change your systems lightly. My company does a lot of work for GlaxoSmithKline in the UK, and they are only just moving to Windows XP (from a Windows NT/2000 mix). And when they’ve reached Windows XP, be assured they’ll plan to stay there for several years to come. Even this upgrade is a major exercise, involving massive expenditure, re-validation of masses of software (admittedly a special case for a highly regulated industry), modifications for any problems, retraining for some staff, to say nothing of remaking their own custom builds of Windows (yes, really)… Across several sites with thousands of workstations, this is an extended effort.
So for anyone looking for them to adopt a complete free software solution based on Linux (or whatever) in one hit, it isn’t going to happen – all it would achieve is amplifying their migration costs. But back to the article – if you really believe in the free software ideal, and you really want corporates to adopt it, you have to take steps to help them reduce or spread the cost of migration. This means making good documentation, putting in features the companies need/want, and maybe even going with the (potentially distasteful to many) interim option of making free software that runs on non-free systems (e.g. Windows).
It’s a question of how strong your ideals are. If you just write the software for fun, sure, carry on and enjoy yourself – no-one can expect any obligation. If it’s for profit you probably already know about delivering to a market. But if you really want to see free (as in speech) software being adopted, then some compromise is required on the way to reaching the ideal.
Ignore the tone of the letter – it’s just a way to present an article. Some of the issues are real though, and much bigger.
Who wrote this letter? It is signed by “Corporate IT executives.” Right. IF some of these executives actually drafted this letter, then they need to get a grip. IF a member of the Open Source community of developers feels like addressing your wish list, then she will. If not, then you better learn to do it _yourself_, because that is what this scene is all about.
>
>
Who the hell else would say something like “Frankly, we’d like to see more open source products for Windows that are more than just the Linux version recompiled, but truly Windows-centric open source tools.”
Why the heck would Open Source developers create or develop Windows-centric open sorce tools when for the most part they aren’t Windows delevopers or particularly interested in creating Windows software?
…of why the corporate IT world will be extremely slow to make a widespread transition to FLOSS — if they ever do. The corporate IT world doesn’t care one whit who makes the hardware or who codes the software. They view computers in general as tools to help make them more productive and profitable. That’s all. They will run very fast away from the zealots, many of whose posts I’ve been reading in this thread.
But y’all will never get it, and that’s why FLOSS will languish in the margins while the for-profit monopoly players will continue to enjoy their monopolies as they get richer & richer.
This “open letter” encourages the FOSS community to “lose the religion”, and then procede to say that we are all about dismantling Microsoft.
Lately, i’ve been hearing people both outside and inside the FOSS community asking us to “lose the religion”. The “religion”, meaning Free as in freedom software, is the single most important aspect of the community.
People like to scapegoat Richard Stallman and his diatribes against propriatary software, but time and time again, he’s proven right. Most recently, his views were validated when Bitkeeper retracted their gratis (aka $0, but non-free) license to open source developers. Unfortunately, this made things complicated for Linus and the rest of the linux kernel developers because they became somewhat dependent on this software.
The fact is, propriatary software is fundementally untrustworthy. Unlike Stallman, i don’t personally claim that closed software is morally wrong, but accepting propriatary software means accepting a paradigm where restrictions on a user’s rights and control occur far more often than expansion of those rights.
The “religion” is what makes Free Software a robust, uncorruptable way of thinking. The more propriatary software we allow to seep into the linux community, the less control we will have over out collective destiny.
Who will pay their pensions and healthcare if they continue to give it away for no commercial gain? Where are new wealth and exports generated?
Redhat, Novell, IBM, and so on. That is who pays OSS developers. The rest of us do it for fun so don’t ask us for a damn thing. Go ask Redhat, Novell, and IBM to implement a wishlist.
Is it really that hard to understand that demanding things from the OSS community is useless? You can’t really demand something from someone you don’t pay, that’s why some of us developers love it. If you want results make your demands to people taking your cash to listen to you.
Interestingly enough, they answer their own open letter. They say “We think companies such as JBoss and Red Hat, which provide professional service and support for open source code, have the right approach.”
That’s the crux of the problem. They don’t see that the right person to place the demands are the distribution and any companies that are already in place to support the open source code.
Distributions can take care of each of these:
* More enterprise-class support:
* Better documentation:
* A focus on the end user:
* A commitment to stay open: (If the primary maintainer owns the copyright to the release branch and all modifications, then it can be made proprietary at any time by the primary maintainer. However, your distribution should be able to fork the last free release and maintain that.)
The last point, “Access to more platforms” is a bit hairy since we’re dealing with portable software and writing something so that it’s completely native requires *a lot* of work, depending on how “native” do you want it? Novell is porting Evolution to Win32. Is that good enough? Firefox exists on Win32. Is that good enough? Every Java app on Linux exists on Win32, is that good enough? If the answer is *no*, then you can try to coax your distribution to take on the job, or get people interested in doing a full native port *for a specific app*. If there’s no real interest, then you’ll have little choice but to hire a contractor to do a full native port. There’s no free lunch. It has nothing to do with religion, cause if it did then virtually every Windows app would instantly run on Linux.
“As one IT architect at a large media company, who asked not to be named”
SNIP
“And, frankly, we’d like to see more open source products for Windows that are more than just the Linux version recompiled, but truly Windows-centric open source tools.”
You have a great product in hand but you want some additional modifications. Well, there are people and comapanies that will tailor the software for you. If the software does not meet your needs, then don’t use it. You have free (as in speech) and in serveral cases free (as in beer or low cost). You have options in hand, don’t be greedy or cheap. On a side note; Would you also like a foot rub too? Where is Linus?
“Losing the religion and building true, robust integration with Windows and existing environments is what will get open source into the data center,”
Grateful user, I can see why you do not what to be named.
“Welcome visitor!
Thank you for your interest in technology information from International Data Group, the leader in the field. We are eager to serve your information needs.
We regret that we can not satisfy this specific content request because it originates from a source that is not authorized to redistribute our material. Please access all of our rich store of technical knowledge directly by clicking on any of the following links:
Thank you for respecting this necessary protection of our intellectual property.
Sincerely, IDG”
Well thank you IDG for not letting me read the damn article! I’m going to bed. Have fun OSNews.
Elvis
I actually like software that is made purely because of their hate for Microsoft. I also don’t care for the reference of open source needs to “lose their relegion” – who is this bonehead to dictate policy in open source?
Sounds to me like he could have shortened the story up by just stating “Linux needs to be more like Microsoft”
Tell these cheap-@$$ exec’s to buy there 300 – 3000 copy’s of Window’s (one for each PC) or learn how to program, and leave Open Source policy to the actual community.
Quote: “Yes, some organisations do use FLOSS. Most do not. They must have been aware of the oppertunity for some time now, but have chosen to pass it up for some reason. For some that reason would be blinkered lack of consideration for a “new way of computing”, for others a sensible and rational consideration of the strategic fit of FLOSS to the attaintment of their corporate goals.”
Possibly because Microsoft has them by the balls with proprietary tie ins that they’re afraid of losing, or are too costly to consider the open source route?
As far as i’m concerned, many of these so called IT execs want to milk OSS applications without any thought. Nothing more and nothing less. They’d sure prefer a OSS application that’s open and stable and free in both speech and cost, rather than pay the overpriced, hijacked proprietary software model that they currently have to do. I mean, they need to increase profits so they can get bigger pay packets and deliver more money to the greedy corporate shareholders!
As an example I was only today just enquiring about a Acer laptop, which curiously, comes preinstalled with Windows XP Profressional. I didn’t want Windows, so I rang asked if I could buy the laptop sans Windows, and was told no, it’s in their contract. I of course, said, “which contract”, to which I was told “our contract with Microsoft”. They can’t sell a PC without an operating system, without Windows. So, in answer to your quoted comment, there’s part of the reason why many companies aren’t taking up FLOSS. Predatory, anti competitive, monopolistic and collusional deals between Microsoft and hardware/software vendors. Of course, the ACCC tells me that Microsoft isn’t a monopoly, and isn’t engaging in anti competitive practices. And i’m flying to Saturn tommorrow on a broomstick!
Once again we have a anti OSS news story on osnews.com. OSS applications are bad because we don’t do what the big corporations want. Hello, we’re not your unpaid slaves corporations! If you want it, then pay people to develop it. Otherwise shut up and piss off.
Dave
Curious. I’m fairly sure the goal of my OS (GNU) was to be free (as in the free software movement kind of free).
As such being popular is a side issue. Sure, its nice to be popular, but it is not the main intention.
I wonder how many people forget that.
So? When I google “USA” and “debt” or “trade decfit” I see that USA in a much worse position than the UK. Or “USA” and “global warming”? Proving what – about as much as the above statement.
This is irrelevant to the topic at hand. I indicated that Linux and FLOSS are used in the american financial sector, which is still the most powerful on the planet. Funny how you completely avoided responding to this and rather tried to divert the debate onto how we are somehow “attacking” you and/or the UK (just for stating the obvious, might I add). Next time perhaps you should try responding to counter-arguments instead…
Not that I really care, as I’m not in the U.S. nor do I particularly like their foreign policy or their environmental record.
Read this and try to spin it
One man’s testimony, from which one shouldn’t generalize. That’s called sample bias. Show me a survey of the employment and lodging status of FLOSS developers, and then we’ll talk.
Hey, yet another failed comeback from Russian Guy. Don’t worry, one day you’ll actually come up with a valid counter-argument…
illustrate the community’s commitment to meet business needs
Oh, get fraggin’ lost. Most FOSS developers couldn’t care less about what the “businness” needs. Don’t forget, we’re a community, formed not around freely satisfying big pocket companies’ demands and needs [these days the demands seem to raise, what the hell, sit down and contribute] but around the thought to create free software that is provided by the people for the people. When some so-called IT managers raise their fat ass*s and start demanding this and that from linux developers, should stop for a moment and think about how huge linux has evolved, how huge work the developers have poured into, and start thinking about: if they could do this, really how much more they can achieve ? There are no frontiers, and devoted coders can sometimes create real miracles.
Really, when some freaks start loudly complaining and demanding all I can think of is that they want to show how much they care and seem to be involved when instead they have just sat with their heads in their behinds for ages, and now start to realize the power that lies in the FOSS development model, and Linux, and just want to get involved.
This open letter really describes where Big Business sees value and is prepared to open their wallet. Sure they could do it themselves but open source developpers could also do it for them, for a fee.
Again, a lot of what makes a software package a viable solution can be chargeable, like support, updated documentation, specific developments etc….
The only thing that is a bit dubious is the thing about the political standing. Without this convictions, there would be no opensource software so it’s a bit asking the thing and its contrary…
If all goes well, FOSS will continue to build on their solid application base, but just fall short of the demands given by enterprise. That way, we can still have the great software that we do now, but the corporate world can keep their stench away. There are companies that cater to you already, in fact, you are probably locked into using one of them now. Pay them your fees and you might get what you want. What’s wrong with that? I thought that’s how the world works.
As far as I’m concerned, it’s perfect the way it is now. Excellent software that falls just short of enterprise expectations (not in all cases of course) on this side, and the smell of greed and commercialism on that side. Please stay over there. We don’t all want your ‘acceptance’ or even your participation.
“Lose the religion”.. Give me a break. The religion is why I’m here.
Please provide all of your goods and services for free.
If I knew it was this easy I would have sent out a letter to farmers to provide me with high-quality free foodstuffs. At least some of them must be living in what was their mother’s house.
It seems like the transition to new editors hasn’t changed the amount of posted flamebait. Not to mention the obvious troll violating rule #1 levying attacks against people that write free software, despite this very website depending on it to operate. Well played.
Gosh i love how the zealots take this sort of criticism so personal. If you toook your two brain cells and rubbed them together you might figure out that this guys list is a roadmap to the success of Linux/FOSS in the corporate IT world. Can’t see the forest for the trees <shakes head>
>One man’s testimony, from which one shouldn’t generalize.
You mean, like this: my ex-gilfriend likes Linux, proof it is ready for desktop?
>Show me a survey of the employment and lodging status of FLOSS developers, and then we’ll talk.
You started it first, remember: Most FLOSS developers are professionnals programmers who are either paid for their FLOSS development, or do it in their spare time from their main job.
I rebuffed it with the opinion of a professional FOSS developer. Now, show me a survey of the employment and lodging status of FLOSS developers, and then we’ll talk.
As usual, 20 minutes later you forget what you said, keeping raving like lunatic how perfect Linux is and how spotless is LinuxLand.
It is exactly what a guy who actually did something for FOSS said: If people don’t start supporting open-source software with more than just lip service…
He was talking about people like you.
Yeah, that was more or less my thought, people code for free for the fun of it, they do what they want and therefor they don’t have to care about whatever it will remain free, supported, fit someone else, in that case they would ask for money aswell.
Also I think many of the code-for-free-people don’t care at all whatever Company A uses their product or not, why would you care if you don’t get any money from it =P
For the few project of which there are support, run in a “company way” and actually some profit that might differ.