MySQL AB to Counter Oracle Buy of Innobase

November 24, 2005 Leave a comment

Another issue that I've posted about before. It looks like MySQL AB may be developing their own transactional database engine for MySQL. From the article: “Obviously because Oracle made that acquisition we are evaluating options to replace that functionality in some way,” said Richard Mason, vice president of MySQL for Europe, the Middle East and Africa (EMEA). “We're not at the point yet where we can go public with what that plan is but we will be shortly.” So, still not a ton of concrete information available, but it's now clear which way MySQL AB is going to go with this. One still has to wonder why they didn't acquire Innobase OY themselves, when they had the chance. Whether MySQL AB will attempt to write the new engine from scratch or use one of the exiting ones as a base remains to be seen. This could also just be posturing as an attempt to get Oracle to renegotiate the InnoDB deal, but considering the size and histories of the companies involved that seems extremely unlikely. I still find it interesting that Oracle considers MySQL AB a direct competitor – I always considered them an indirect competitor. One thing is becoming clear though, and that is that MySQL AB is in a tough space right now. With SQLite, firebird and PostgreSQL gaining popularity on the Open side and free or extremely inexpensive releases of Oracle, MS SQL and DB2 available on the proprietary side, MySQL is in that sometimes dangerous middle ground. They do however have one significant advantage though, and that is application support. If they can continue the current trend of many popular apps only containing support for MySQL, that could be the wild card they need. As the other DB's gain in popularity though, that may be a tough thing to do.
, , , , ,
–jeremy

Filed under Main Page, Open Source

Microsoft to Open up Office Formats?

November 23, 2005 1 Comment

This is a topic I've covered quite a bit recently and one that I think is extremely important. The main problem I see with this press release is the lack of details. I've seen rumors that only the information to write will be included, which would seem odd, considering MA's main concern was people being able to read Government documents. It should be noted that this is at least 12-18 months off (an eternity in this industry). It should also be noted that this is going to be an ISO standard, not a completely “open” standard. This could get Microsoft the ability to say their documents are a “standard”, without being beneficial to others in the way a standard developed transparently in the open would. How? Let's say they release office version X and then submit to ISO. 12-18 months later the standard is available and people like OOo can properly implement. By the time that is done though, Office version X+1 will be nearing release. Microsoft could completely change the format, submit to ISO and then the waiting game begins again. In reality, the competition's access to the format lags so far behind that it's nearly useless. Sneaky. This is something I'll be watching closely and I'll be sure to post updates as more information becomes available.
, , ,
–jeremy

Filed under Main Page, Microsoft, Open Source

New LQ Site is in Internal Beta

November 20, 2005 2 Comments

Been a long time coming, but the new LQ site is now in an internal sort of beta and the mods are having at at. What's this mean if you're an LQ member that has been waiting for the upgrade? We have set the tentative date for public release at December 3rd, which is less than 2 weeks away. The changes are significant and pretty much no part of the code remains unchanged. Despite that I think you'll find the LQ look and feel, which focuses on data and information – not being too flashy or fancy. I'll probably leave a few more breadcrumbs here and there and I'll give more upgrade info as the date draws closer. Stay tuned – I think you'll find it worth the wait.
–jeremy

Filed under Linux, Main Page, Open Source

OSDL and the Linux Kernel Community

November 15, 2005 2 Comments

I mentioned in a previous post that I hoped Greg's comments on OSDL technical management were just an anomaly or simple miscommunication. Greg was kind enough to point out to me that this is unfortunately not the case. Currently they seem to be still ignoring us, as nothing has changed (yeah, lots of talk, but no real actions…) But, we have a slot on the board meeting in January to discuss our point-of-view, so we are not giving up yet. As I also mentioned in my last post, I'd hate to see OSDL drop the ball here. Their distribution agnostic employment of Linus, Andrew and others as well as some of the additional projects and initiatives they have going have become not only extremely important, but woven into the current framework. It's not like either Linus or Andrew would be hurting for a job if something happened to OSDL – companies would be waiting in line to be the ones that sign those checks. But, would that company offer the kind of vendor neutral, distro agnostic, non-commercial setup that they currently have? Who knows… but Linus has certainly shown that this is something that's important to him (and for good reason). FWIW, I'd be happy to help in whatever capacity I can. LQ was an OSDL Linux Summit sponsor last year and we're working on it for this year also, so I may be able to get somebodies ear from that angle. Additionally, I'd by happy to work with OSDL in any capacity that they think could help them with their “community building” skills. LQ has grown to over 200,000 members and 2,000,000 posts so I'd like to think I could help in some capacity. If anyone is interested, don't hesitate to contact me – even if it's just to chat or throw ideas around. This is sometimes that is important and worth working on to do correctly. Now, I'm sure there is plenty on both sides that I'm not aware of – but I'm more than willing to listen and learn.
, , ,
–jeremy

Filed under Linux, Main Page, Open Source

Google is at it Again – Web Analytics II

November 15, 2005 Leave a comment

Just a quick follow up to this post. The product looks extremely cool and at the price (free) some of the competing vendors had to be quite concerned. The WebSideStory stock fell almost 15% on the news, to give you an idea of the impact this is going to have. BUT, this has to be the all time worst Google rollout ever… and the product wasn't even released as BETA. I got in early in the morning and the site was almost unusable. Got a quick site set up and it said I'd have reports in 6-12 hours. Shortly after that the site went to completely usable and then into a “maintenance” mode. I tried a little after midnight and the site was up, but really slow, and still no reports. It's now been over 36 hours and while the site is starting to get more responsive, still no reports. I can appreciate that the product is new (but not BETA) and is gratis, but this is a bit unGoogle. You think they'd be used to the high demand for new products and plan appropriately here. This is probably the worst press I've ever seen Google get. What's worse is that they've been completely mum on the topic. A quick “Sorry, we under anticipated demand and will have things working in 48 hours” would have done a whole lot to quell the hard feelings. I'll post another update when things finally start working.
7PM Update: Stil no reports, but it looks like they're coming soon.
, ,
–jeremy

Filed under Main Page, Open Source

Birthday Memo leaked on Purpose?

November 12, 2005 1 Comment

Robert X. Cringely thinks the birthday memo may have been leaked on purpose. Some of the reasons he gives really make sense. Is Microsoft using this as a PR stunt meant to both entice Wall Street while painting Google as the bad guy (and itself as the good guy)? Here's a snippet from the article: These Microsoft memos look like a plan to do the same thing Microsoft “thinks” Google will be doing. By publicly stating their plans and putting those plans in the hands of Wall Street, Microsoft is giving the perception they are doing the same things as Google, so Microsoft will be as good an investment as Google.
The real questions to me are: 1) Is Microsoft sincere in its focus change (whether the memo's were leaked on purpose doesn't matter in this context) and 2) If it is sincere, will it be able to execute. Don't forget that, historically, Microsoft is not willing to do anything that even has a remote chance of in any way damaging their cash cows – Windows and Office. What are others saying about this? Scoble has a summary post. I find it interesting that mini-MSFT has been completely silent on this topic.

–jeremy

Filed under Main Page, Microsoft, Open Source

Suse Linux Founder Exits Novell

November 10, 2005 1 Comment

Suse Linux founder, and kernel maintainer for more then a decade, Hubert Mantel has announced his resignation from Novell. “Too late for me. I just decided to leave Suse/Novell, this is no longer the company I founded 13 years ago.” were his parting words. Novell has a terrible history of wasted opportunity with technically superior products, but poor marketing. I held high hopes for them this time, but with this news along with the layoffs and other high profile departures, one has to wonder. I think the following comment is extremely telling: “I have been the maintainer of the Suse kernel for more than a decade now,” Mantel wrote. “I'm very confident the Novell management will find a competent successor very quickly. After all, there are lots of extremely skilled people over there in the Ximian division.” Clearly there is more to this story. Does it have to do with the recent KDE announcement? Does it have to do with a different internal struggle that was lost by the Suse division? Hard to tell at this point, but the recent grumblings I've heard about “being noising” gaining more ground within the company than “being correct” may have some basis. Please Novell, don't screw this up. Having two solid Enterprise distributions is critical. Companies learned a lesson with Microsoft, and they don't want to be beholden to a single company anymore. I'd guess we'll hear more details and see more fallout from this turn of events quite soon.
, , ,
–jeremy

Filed under Linux, Main Page, Open Source

Gates/Ozzie Challenge Microsoft to “Alter Its Business” – Birthday Memo

November 9, 2005 1 Comment

Another leaked memo from Microsoft (Dave has posted the full emails here). “This coming 'services wave' will be very disruptive,” Gates said in an Oct. 30 e-mail to top Microsoft employees. “We have competitors who will seize on these approaches and challenge us.” The service wave has been coming for a while, it's all part of the ever popular Web2.0 meme. Microsoft once again finds itself waking up late to the party and realizing that they've been left behind. A day late, but never a dollar short. On the bright side for them, they aren't as late to this party as they've been for some others. However, unlike some previous occasions, they won't really be able to leverage their desktop monopoly in this case – at least not to the degree they have in others. Google transcends the OS. Beyond that, though, it's tuned into a verb… it has mindshare. While Microsoft can throw a huge amount of eyeballs at their offering, that doesn't always help. Take the auction space for instance. Amazon and Yahoo! throw huge amount of eyeballs at their respective offerings, but neither has put a dent in eBay. Like Google, eBay has mindshare in their space. Microsoft has proven to always be a worthy adversary, but outside the desktop and related areas they don't always win. The Xbox is still a loser to the PlayStation, MS-based MP3 players are losing big time to the iPod, Windows-based phone aren't what Microsoft hoped – you get the idea. Unlike say Netscape, from the past, I think Google is in this one for the long haul and is positioned well to hold its own. Scoble, who you have to think has had some influence on this thinking (be it directly or indirectly) is still reeling from the memos. It should be interesting to read what he has to stay when he stops reeling. This should be a battle the like of which the space hasn't seen in years. In the end, the consumer will be the ones who benefits from the competition. Should be a fun ride.
, ,
–jeremy

Filed under Main Page, Microsoft, Open Source

Should Linux Have a Binary Kernel Driver Layer?

November 8, 2005 Leave a comment

For those of you that follow LKML at all, you know this is a hotly debated topic. Greg K-H recently posted aboutan OSDL meeting on this topic, along with a follow up. This is a really interesting topic to me. Now, we all know that binary drivers are bad. Here's a post from a Microsoft employee with some details. Like most stories though, there are multiple sides with multiple views here. There are certainly some cases where a company releasing a 100% GPL driver is impossible, due to licensing, 3rd party agreements, whatever. I've even heard (warning, I've not taken the time to verify this) that in some cases it would be illegal to even release proper documentation on API's and interfaces, which would allow kernel maintainers to write a driver. In some other cases, a company may simply decide they don't want to release a Linux driver (be it company culture, company policy, FUD, to prevent tampering, a PHB's whim – whatever). The reality though is that the less driver support there is for Linux, the less mass adoption we'll get. I don't think that is arguable. BUT, the reason I like Linux and one of the reasons it has gotten as far as it has is because it values technical correctness, stability and performance over “adoption”. The question is, and I posted something else about this recently, what price are we willing to pay for mass adoption. It's a tough question and the answer certainly depends on what side of the coin you're on. I for one hope we continue to value technical correctness, speed and stability. For now, I think we will. As for the long run, well – I'm not sure.
On an unrelated note, I find Greg's comments on OSDL “technical management” a bit troubling. OSDL has become quite important to Linux and I'd hate to see them drop the ball. Let's hope this was just an anomaly or a genuine one time miscommunication (which certainly happen).
, ,
–jeremy

Filed under Linux, Main Page, Open Source

Microsoft: Open Source Not That Open

November 8, 2005 1 Comment

This article is about a presentation that was made at the OSBC. LQ was a show sponsor and I had hoped to attend, but that didn't work out. Jason Matusow, director of Microsoft's Shared Source Initiative, claimed that Open Source is really not all that open. He bases this on the following:
Red Hat issues patch updates for its premium offering, Red Hat Enterprise Linux, and keeps customers' IT infrastructure secure.
“But if a customer modifies the source code, [Red Hat] can't help you [without charging you extra]. They have to lock things down to provide value,” Matusow said. “As open source becomes commercialized, it becomes less open.”
Sound reasonable right? No, not at all. He's missing multiple points and is trying to create FUD (or is misinformed). First, you can make all the changes you want and still get support from Red Hat – as long as you can prove you didn't cause the breakage. This just makes sense. Change some Firefox code and have a kernel problem? The kernel would be 100% supported by Red Hat. Change some kernel code and have a kernel problem? Obviously you'll need to recreate the problem with a stock kernel or diagnose the problem yourself. That's not less open, it's common sense. In fact, it's the way many many industries work (Change the tires on your car and have an engine problem, Ford will help you. Change the engines internals and have an engine problem, you're on your own). Beyond this though, he misses one of the main benefits of Open Source from a client perspective. You avoid vendor lockin! Don't like the kernel support you are getting from Red Hat? What if they discontinue support for a product you use? Go to Novell, IBM , Progeny or one of the other myriad support services that will be happy to help you. You can even hire a whizzbang kernel guy and do it in house. The choice is yours. Have that same problem in a closed shop and your options are 0. Once Microsoft abandons a product it is 100% unsupported…and worse it's 100% unsupportable! No code upgrades, no bug fixes, no security patches – ever.
One final thing that I found amusing was the following comment: We are building intellectual property into software and trying to sell it. We throw code over the wall for the community to build on it. Throw code over the wall?? Seems like an odd choice of words to me, almost condescending. And he said this in a room full of Open Source people, which means that statement made it past the PR people! Do you really want a vendor that not only talks that way, but thinks that way? The choice is yours.
, , , ,
–jeremy

Filed under Linux, Main Page, Microsoft, Open Source

← Older posts

Newer posts →