OSBC Underway

May 22, 2007 1 Comment

The OSBC is officially underway. The opening keynote was the always interesting Matthew Szulik. I’m not sure who does the Red Hat short videos, but they are consistently both entertaining and compelling (even if some of the themes are reused quite a bit). Some interesting tidbits from the keynote:

* Open Source no longer needs to be validated
* Open Source has the ability to change IT from a cost to a value
* A long while back, while trying to get VC for Red Hat, someone asked Matt when he was going to “give up on this gimmick”
* In his opinion he feels that Open Source also has a social responsibility component. He gives as an example a research institute that had to ditch a decade of breast cancer research due to data incompatibilities
* He welcomes the competition from the likes of Oracle, and sees it as a management responsibility to compete…and not a technical issue
* He often feels in sales meetings that the crowd is divided – the 40+ crowd dislikes him (not personally, of course) and the 25-ish crowd thinks he’s pretty cool
* We are only at the beginning of the Open Source cycle… and cycles in this industry are the norm

–jeremy

Filed under Open Source, OSBC, Red Hat

Is Centric CRM an Open Source Company?

May 15, 2007 Leave a comment

I have to agree with Stephe that Centric CRM is not Open Source. You need look no further than the first couple lines of their license to see this:

This Centric Public License is based on United States Copyright law, as defined by Title 17 of the United States Code.

In particular, our intent is that:

You may use, copy, modify, and make derivative works from the code for internal use only.

You may not redistribute the code, and you may not sublicense copies or derivatives of the code, either as software or as a service.

Now, you get the code which is nice and they are certainly more than free to pursue whatever business model they’d like. While I have never used the product, it might even be great software. But it’s not Open Source. I also wonder how the product made it into RHX, which has the stated goal:

Red Hat Exchange helps you compare, buy, and manage open source business applications. All in one place and backed by the open source leader. We’ve collaborated with our open source software partners to validate that RHX applications run on Red Hat Enterprise Linux and are delivered through the Red Hat Network. At RHX, Red Hat provides customers with a single point of contact for support.

Now, it’s possible that I am missing something. Maybe an upcoming version of the product has a different license? If so, I was not able to find any indication of that on the site… but I’ll keep poking around.

–jeremy

Filed under Open Source, Red Hat

Red Hat to build 'Global Desktop'

May 10, 2007 1 Comment

Quite a bit of news coming out of the Red Hat Summit. I really would have liked to attend this, but somehow the date slipped by me. Hopefully next year. One of the major announcements made was ‘Global Desktop’. From the article:

Red Hat is preparing to release a new ‘Global Desktop’ that over time will grow into an online desktop which integrates online services into a client desktop platform.

The platform will allow users to access online and local data in a unified way.

Red Hat has teamed up with Intel for the platform. Local PC manufacturers will build the actual systems.

The software borrows from the One Laptop Per Child (OLPC) project, with about 95 per cent of the code overlapping.

The OLPC uses an adapted version of Red Hat’s Fedora Linux. The Global Desktop won’t share the OLPC’s ‘Sugar’ user interface, but will come bundled with applications such as Firefox and OpenOffice.

The first version of the software is due out in June and will use a traditional user interface.

Subsequent updates will move to a model where traditional applications are integrated with online services, said Red Hat chief technology officer Brian Stevens.

“It will take online services and integrate them richly into a client desktop, and make them first class citizens with the traditional applications,” Stevens said in a keynote at the Red Hat Summit in San Diego.

Integrating online services with local data is required for the next-generation desktop, he argued. Data will be pulled onto the client using service oriented architectures (SOAs).

Note that this has two very specific target markets: Emerging Markets and Enterprise. This doesn’t seem like something meant to be used for mass consumer adoption. At least not yet. While the merging of online and offline seem inevitable long term, the details to getting that system to work for the average person just isn’t quite here. There are just too many times I’m in an airplane or the tube or for this to work today. However, once apps like Firefox can seamlessly give me access to apps while I’m offline and then sync when access is available, this will trickle into the mainstream quickly. By targeting markets for which this technology is good enough now, Red Hat is positioning themselves to pounce when the opportunity is right. It seems to me that a perfect partner here would be Google, but I’ve not seen any official word on that front. The official press release is available here.

–jeremy

Filed under Google, Linux, Open Source, Red Hat

Unbreakable Linux: The untold story

April 5, 2007 Leave a comment

Mike Olson, vice president of Embedded Technologies at Oracle, recently posted an interesting entry on his blog about Unbreakable Linux (via Matt). The article details why RHEL was chosen and how Oracle contributes to Linux. Keep in mind that Mike works for Oracle, but via the Sleepycat aquisition. He knows Open Source. Now, I never found it odd that Oracle chose RHEL. I’d have found it odd if they chose anything else in fact. In the Oracle Linux space, Red Hat dominates. I did wonder why the respun CentOS though. It just doesn’t make a lot of sense to me. They’re directly competing with Red Hat with Red Hat’s own product. Sure the GPL allows that. I just don’t think it makes sense from a business perspective. Not when they could have partnered with Red Hat and gotten 95% the same thing. The 5% will make a real difference in the long run. As a major partner, they would have been providing real value to Red Hat. This in turn would encourage Red Hat to provide value to them. Early access to code, development road maps, etc. Enterprise customers would have gotten the proverbial one neck to choke (which the really do like) and Oracle would have been the single point of contact for Linux support on the RHEL product for their customers. The way they have it now, they will be in a perpetual state of playing catchup with new RHEL releases, with no help from Red Hat. In the end, what they wanted to do made a ton of sense… I just don’t think they went about it the best way. How it will play out long term remains to be seen.

–jeremy

Filed under Linux, Open Source, Oracle, Red Hat

Oracle Linux adopters labelled 'idiots'

April 2, 2007 Leave a comment

Just ran across this odd story over at ZNNet AU. From the article:

One of the first converts to Oracle’s support for Linux has revealed the public backlash it has endured since their decision to drop Red Hat.

Melbourne company Opes Prime Stockbroking told ZDNet Australia that in the weeks following its announcement to adopt Oracle Linux, upset Linux enthusiasts phoned, e-mailed and wrote about the company online to complain at the decision.

“People called us out of the blue to tell us we were idiots,” said Opes executive director Anthony Blumberg.

He also fielded a call from an unhappy Red Hat Australia and New Zealand managing director Max McLaren.

I’m not familiar with Opes Prime Stockbroking and hadn’t seen any bashing going on, but I have trouble imaging why any Linux enthusiast would take the time to do something like that. If they did, it’s surely not indicative of the attitude of the larger Linux community. Looking at the history, the company seems like a prime target for the Oracle product anyway. First, they weren’t even a Red Hat customer. They had acquired the licenses through Dell, which means Dell provides the first level of support…not RHT. Second, the company has a very small number of servers, but is a heavy Oracle user (both database and application server). If this story is true, and isn’t the result of some misguided astroturfing, I hope it doesn’t end up reflecting poorly on the greater ecosystem. The level of professionalism I have seen recently in the Open Source realm is second to none. It’s a shame when a disingenuous few tarnish the hard earned reputation of most.

–jeremy

Filed under Linux, Open Source, Oracle, Red Hat

Enterprise Apps Header Red Hat Plans Linux Desktop Offering 'for the Masses'

March 20, 2007 Leave a comment

Speaking of Linux on the Desktop, it looks like Red Hat is getting back into the Desktop Linux market. From the article:

Red Hat is planning a packaged Linux desktop solution that it hopes will push its Linux desktop offering to a far broader audience than exists for its current client solution.

“This will be a more comprehensive offering that will target markets like the small and medium-sized business [SMB] sector and emerging markets. Part of this strategy is to get the desktop more to the masses than our existing client is getting today. So there will be a different packaged solution for the masses coming down the pike,” he said.

Asked if part of the strategy is the mass consumer market, Cornier responded that Red Had has “no plans to go and sell this offering at Best Buy, if that’s what you mean by the mass consumer market. Customers will be able to download it and get a Red Hat Network subscription on the Web for it, which is what we feel is the distribution wave of the future anyway,” he said.

I’ve always thought Red Hat was missing an important part of the market by not offering a maintenance but no support option. That’s basically what RHL was. For my part, I still maintain that Fedora is not a viable option for the average Linux user. If you’re a developer it’s not bad (in fact I use it on both my main home desktop and my main work desktop), but the initial roll out was poor, the packaging paradigm keeps changing (I don’t mean at the RPM level, but at the Core+Extras flips that go on every couple version), the upgrades often break things and with Fedora Legacy gone the upgrade cycle is too fast for a non-enthusiast. I don’t mean this to mean that the project isn’t doing some absolutely awesome things as they are, it’s just that I think people try to do with Fedora things they shouldn’t (mainly, act like it’s RHL). If you can believe it, RH9 is still one of the most downloaded distro’s at LQ ISO. To me, that speaks volumes. The article was a bit light on details but I am looking forward to seeing what the product actually entails.

On the desktop note, I’ve really been meaning to try SLED and have heard some great things about it (although the patent deal did put my off a bit on installing it to be honest). I just haven’t had the chance though. Hopefully soon. They announced the SP1 beta at Brainshare, so now is as good a time as any. They also released this “Mac Guy” spoof, which is superbly done. On the distribution front, after hanging out with Jono a bit at SCALE I finally installed Ubuntu for the first time (on my laptop). Not bad at all and I’m interested to see how it survives a little use and an upgrade or two. The amount of quality choice we have in the Linux market today is truly phenomenal.

–jeremy

Filed under Fedora, Linux, Novell, Open Source, Red Hat, Ubuntu

Red Hat Launches Open-Source Exchange

March 14, 2007 Leave a comment

The software company is unveiling an online marketplace for Open Source developers—where Red Hat can sell support, and links to its own products. From the article:

Red Hat signaled a strategic shift on Mar. 14 when it announced an initiative called the Red Hat Exchange (rhx), an online marketplace where it will sell products from more than a dozen open-source companies including Mysql, Sugarcrm, and Al Fresco Software. The exchange could make a wide range of software attractive to businesses large and small that have been put off by the challenges of buying from lesser-known suppliers and piecing it all together.

When rhx goes live in the second quarter, Red Hat will guarantee that the other companies’ products work well with its own, and the company will provide tech support for all of them. The marketplace will be much more than just an online product catalog. It’s designed to function as a community where users of open-source software can read reviews, rate the products, and compare notes.

Open-source software is made collaboratively by developers from around the world and is available for anybody to use, free of charge. Red Hat and others sell commercial versions that include extra software, documentation, and support. Says Red Hat chief executive Matthew J. Szulik, “Rhx gives us the opportunity to be the flag bearer for open-source software.”

Partners at launch will include Alfresco, Jaspersoft, MySQL and SugarCRM. The article is light on details, such as what level of support is offered by Red Hat before you go upstream and what kind of revenue share is involved. One thing is clear to me though; this is good for Open Source. It’s the beginning of a bona fide commercial Open Source ecosystem, the likes of which we’ve not yet seen. The importance of an ecosystem is one thing that Microsoft used to really get. It’s one of the things that has made them as strong as they are. But as their stock has slumped in recent years, they’ve begun to canabilize both ISV’s and partners. That makes now a golden opportunity for something like this. The Exchange should launch next quarter and is something I’ll definitely keep an eye on.

–jeremy

Filed under Linux, Microsoft, Open Source, Red Hat

Open Source Business Models: A Wall Street Look at a Wild 2006 and the Prospects for Even More Fun in 2007

March 12, 2007 Leave a comment

Stephen Walli points to a presentation from EclipseCon by Brent Williams entitled: “Open Source Business Models: A Wall Street Look at a Wild 2006 and the Prospects for Even More Fun in 2007”.  The presentation is fairly long at 48 slides, but contains some very good information.  You might not agree with all the specific details presented in the slide, but the end result comes together nicely.  His interface standard vs implementation standard explanation using a Lamborghini Murcielago vs. Hyundai Excel drives home the point nicely.  He also covers commoditization issues and the recent Oracle Linux foray, among others items, quite well.  Overall the presentation is definitely worth the read.  I wish I’d have been at EclipseCon to see it myself.

–jeremy

Filed under Linux, Open Source, Oracle, Red Hat

Ballmer repeats threats against Linux

February 21, 2007 1 Comment

Novell execs must cringe when they see things like this:
Steve Ballmer has reissued Microsoft's patent threat against Linux, warning open-source vendors that they must respect his company's intellectual property.
In a no-nonsense presentation to New York financial analysts last week, Microsoft's chief executive said the company's partnership with Novell, which it signed in November 2006, “demonstrated clearly the value of intellectual property, even in the open-source world.”
The cross-selling partnership means that Microsoft will recommend Suse Linux for customers who want a mixed Microsoft/open-source environment. It also involves a “patent co-operation agreement”, under which Microsoft and Novell agreed not to sue each other's customers for patent infringement.
In a clear threat against open-source users, Ballmer repeated his earlier assertions that open source “is not free”, referring to the possibility that Microsoft may sue Linux vendors. Microsoft has suggested that Linux software infringes some of its intellectual property, but has never named the patents in question.
Ballmer said: “I would not anticipate that we make a huge additional revenue stream from our Novell deal, but I do think it clearly establishes that open source is not free, and open source will have to respect the intellectual property rights of others just as any other competitor will.”
He almost makes it sound like the real value to Microsoft, and the real intention of the agreement, was simply to posture for further protection money from others. I wonder how Novell feels about that in retrospect. Matt Asay asks: “Steve Ballmer: Was this the friend Novell wanted?” I think the answer to that is now clear.
I still wonder if Microsoft realistically thinks they can sue. The amount of potential litigation that could get thrown back is substantial. Red Hat seems to be one of the more likely Microsoft targets, but don't forget that the likes of IBM depend on Linux sales for large chunks of consulting money. It's even more interesting now that Oracle is selling what is in essence a RHEL clone. At this point in the game, I wonder how effective this kind of FUD slinging really is anyway. A few of years ago, many people were fooled. These days, that's certainly changing. Ballmer, it would seem, is not changing with the times. It's unfortunate, as some parts of Microsoft seem to be be attempting to.
–jeremy

Filed under Linux, Main Page, Microsoft, Novell, Open Source, Oracle, Red Hat

Red Hat joins Microsoft interop initiative

February 14, 2007 Leave a comment

A post in CBR points out that Red Hat has joined Microsoft's Interop Vendor Alliance. As the article points out though, this seems to be related to JBoss only (remember that JBoss was already working directly with Microsoft on interoperability). There is no mention of any other Red Hat related bits, such as RHEL or RHN. From the article:
While Red Hat has vowed not to pay Microsoft an “innovation tax” via a patent deal with the software giant, it has proven that it is not averse to working on interoperability and has signed up as a member of Microsoft’s Interop Vendor Alliance.
The IVA was formed in November with 25 other software and hardware vendors to ensure that their offerings are able to interoperate with Microsoft's Windows operating system and applications.
IVA members included Novell, of course, as well as other open source vendors including Sun, SugarCRM, XenSource and Centeris, as well as BEA, Business Objects, Citrix, Software AG, and Quest Software.
Missing from the list of open source vendors Microsoft had already struck an interoperability deal with was JBoss, despite their November 2005 integration agreement.
Red Hat’s decision to join the IVA makes sense given that agreement, and appears to be limited, at least at first, to the JBoss middleware stack.
Matt Asay says that the need for a group like this underscores that the market is currently broken in ways. From his post:
The strange thing in this announcement, and in the existence of the VIA, is that we have to talk about interoperability at all. It is precisely because the system is broken – with intellectual property rights driving vendors apart, rather than together – that something like this VIA is even remotely interesting.
But still I wonder if an industry alliance is the way to resolve the problem. Yes, you need scale/network effects to make something like this work. But in a large room filled with vendors who inherently distrust each other, I don’t see much interoperability emerging. Just lots of meetings about interoperability.
If the goal is to get one-on-one interaction, what good does the Alliance provide? Not much, in my view.
Since JBoss and Microsoft were already working together, it's hard to say what additional will be gained by this. It may have simply been to formalize the relationship and get a little PR, which is fine. What I wanted to point out here and what I think is important for some Novell execs to realize is that you don't see anyone freaking out about this… despite the fact that Microsoft is involved. The response by some seemed to be that the only reason the community reacted to the MSFT-NOVL deal the way they did was because it was a deal with Microsoft. Hopefully this points out that was definitively untrue. Working with Microsoft in places that are genuinely mutually beneficial is fine – some would even say it makes sense. After all, interop is absolutely key for customers and customers are really what it's all about in the end.
–jeremy

Filed under Linux, Main Page, Microsoft, Novell, Open Source, Red Hat

← Older posts

Newer posts →