Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room

Article: Open source thrives in downturn

<< < (3/3)

zridling:
The economic issue involved is complicated by regional piracy around the globe. I cheerlead open standards because of what Simon Phipps teaches us about the 'freedom to leave.' Proprietary software is designed to lock the user in, not to be compatible with, or collaborate and interoperate with another platform. These are recognized strengths of open source, beyond cost benefits, though open source does not equal "free" software (as in price).

In practice today, I think the balance and competition between proprietary and open source software is improving software in general and driving innovation. We even need vigorous competition within the open source world if we choose to ignore proprietary software. One example: the emergence and popularity of Firefox has goaded Microsoft into making IE better.

We all want better software. We all want software that gets the job done with the flexibility and assurances for the future that our situations require. Competition among software providers is good for consumers, especially when there are open standards that allow interoperability and interchangeability. If commercial vendors develop to their own standard, they won't be getting much business in the next 20 years, I can promise that.

40hz:
PS.
No, I'm not working for Microsoft.-wasker (December 25, 2008, 02:36 PM)
--- End quote ---

Bummer! The only reason I asked is because a lot of what you are saying (along with the overall tone) strongly resembles things I see on the Microsoft Partner website and in TechNet white papers.

It's hard to find Microsoft employees that are willing to get into an open forum discussion. (I suspect they have a corporate policy about them not doing that.) Still, I was hoping you were with Microsoft since it would be refreshing to get into a conversation with someone who's with The Mothership.

Hope you weren't offended by my asking. :Thmbsup:


Finally you got it! -wasker (December 25, 2008, 02:36 PM)
--- End quote ---

Yup. And I disagree.

(Actually, I "got it" quite a while back. Trust me, I'm nowhere near as dumb as I look. ;) )


Now you have a number (85%) and NO additional information and you're so happy to read about 85% completely neglecting the fact that you don't know a thing about what this number consists of.
-wasker (December 25, 2008, 02:36 PM)
--- End quote ---

Hmm...I didn't realize I was "so happy" to read about anything. Thanks for bringing that to my attention. And all this time I just thought I was sharing my thoughts and opinions on the topic. :)

And I do know something about that 85% that seems to bothering you. I know that Gartner:

   a) knows what constitutes open source software

   b) surveyed 274 companies

   c) found that 233 of those 274 companies (i.e. 85%) were using open source software

   d) were told by the remaining 41 companies that they planned to use open source products in the upcoming year

and

   e0 (as was mentioned earlier), that their report also included the following:

The three principle reasons for open source that Gartner found are lower software costs, lower development costs and easier start-up of new IT projects. Other reasons frequently mentioned are independence from a single software manufacturer and faster development processes. Customer service applications are the leading non-infrastructure workload for which open source software is used, followed by enterprise integration, finance and administration, and business analytics applications. The biggest problem with open source, according to Gartner, is the fact that nearly 70 percent of those surveyed have no explicit guidelines for the deployment of open source.
--- End quote ---

To my way of looking at it, this is all rather clear: A product is either open source or it's not. Either 233 out of the 274 surveyed companies are using open source, or they're not. Gartner is either truthfully reporting their findings, or they're not. And the reasons Gartner has reported they were given by the companies surveyed are either true, or they're not.

I really don't see what is so mysterious or hard to comprehend. The definitions and numbers are very specific. Now, I know it has become fashionable, in some quarters, to automatically dispute any statistical claim. But considering when you look at the specifics, this is hardly a figure or report that lends itself to that sort of debate.

I think I have a considerably more to go on than you have with your assertion (which you continue to repeat without offering any specifics) that this 85% number is meaningless.

Sorry to rain on your parade, but 99% of Mom and Pop's businesses will either stay as Mom and Pop's businesses or go out of business altogether.
-wasker (December 25, 2008, 02:36 PM)
--- End quote ---

Interesting...I wasn't aware I even had "a parade" to rain on. But to your comment about small businesses: So what?

If they do go out of business, or stay small, I doubt (except in very special cases) that it would have much to do with what software they were running.

(Actually, I've heard different than 99% - but I suppose that too would depend on whose reported numbers you choose to believe and whose parade you wanted to rain on. ;D)

-----------------------

OK. Seems to me like you and me are starting to go around in circles, so I'm going to bow out of the conversation and let somebody else take the floor.

Anybody else out there that "Gets it?" ;D

Edvard:
I think the original intent of the article has less to do with the statistics of WHO is installing WHAT, but to show how an economic downturn has far less impact on deployment of Open Source technologies and in fact has a sort of 'boosting' effect as more companies are turning to the best solution for the lowest price.

This also means is that 41 of those companies were either NOT investing in new thingummies and sticking with what they already paid for (not spending anything), or upgrading what they already had in place (spending as minimally as possible).

AND we're talking major players here, not mom-and-pop stores. This is a BIG survey of BIG companies. Which is how Gartner gets away with charging BIG money for survey results. And I highly doubt anybody is going to deploy KeePass and then report it in bold type on their bottom line.

Wasker, I would also be hungry to know exactly WHAT they are deploying and just how mission-critical it is, but rest assured it would be anything trivial.
Sensationalism? What else can you say about something sensational?
 :Thmbsup:

40hz:
I would also be hungry to know exactly WHAT they are deploying and just how mission-critical it is,
-Edvard (December 26, 2008, 11:23 AM)
--- End quote ---

Edvard: I think this can assuage your hunger for "More Cowbell." ;D

Heise Online covered the Gartner report in a bit more detail. Full article at:

http://www.heise-online.co.uk/open/Gartner-Open-Source-is-pervasive--/news/111991

The survey revealed that open source was particularly popular in the infrastructure sector, but that the number of free business-related applications was on the increase. On the whole, says Gartner, you are just as likely to find open source solutions in business-critical as in non-critical areas.

***

Customer service applications are the leading non-infrastructure workload for which open source software is used, followed by enterprise integration, finance and administration, and business analytics applications.
--- End quote ---

These sound like fairly business-critical apps to me. ;)

And yes, I must confess...I was sorely disappointed not to find any mention of Keypass in there...<*sigh*>...  ;D

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page