113391 Resource 102302 102466 102466 1137555084289 1137555084289 Controlled Can Open Source Float Down the Revenue Stream?

Operating System, OK. Database, well alright. Applications, yeah I don't know.

<p>Caught up with a good online discussion about open source software. <a href="http://www.onlamp.com/pub/a/onlamp/2006/01/12/no_oss_community.html?page=1">The original article is by John Mark Walker</a> and it makes a compelling argument that the driver of open source is the commoditization of software, exacerbated, enabled or unleashed - depending on how much revenue you've lost/gained - by the Internet. <a title="nick carr" href="http://www.roughtype.com/archives/2006/01/the_amorality_o_1.php">Nick Carr picked it up in his blo</a>g and generally agrees with the assertion that it's not ideology, or idealism for that matter, that created the open source movement but economics, the Marxian materialism of old dorm room discussions rears again its ugly head.</p><p>The discussion made me recall the English Revolution, 1640 to 1660 or thereabouts, when Cromwell took over the country and had the King beheaded. Well, I guess it wasn't Cromwell himself, but you know how these things mutate over time. Studying the events of these days I read <a href="http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0140137114/026-1414254-7420445">&quot;God's Englishman: Oliver Cromwell and the English Revolution&quot;</a> by Christopher Hill. Fascinating book, and one thing really stood out about it. Throughout the several section of this history Hill places supreme importance on the role of Economics in fomenting and driving the revolution until the last section, until, that is, the revolution itself. As the moment of truth draws near, it is not bread that tilts the scale to violent action, but religion. </p><p>It is an interesting theory and one that I continue to see played out in our own world. Now, I am not for a moment trying to compare the English Revolution to the open source, what? community? idea? movement seems almost too much a description, but I am pointing out that Carr and Walker should not, as they do, discredit the idea that people in the movement have the capacity to belong and believe based on realities other than economic. In many respects the open source revolution happened first; people identified with the movement and joined out of idealism and other intangibles. Once established the economics of the movement helped to morph it into an opportunity. Open source today is simply another mode of software and squarely has become completely economic in its motivations.</p><p>So where can it go? What can open source achieve? This is the most interesting question for me. Maybe some of the idealism that originally stoked its fire has been tamped down, but there are now several going concerns out there and more added all the time. I have argued before that open source in the application layer is another example of what the general public seems now to take for granted in the software, and in fact the entire technology, industry, but which we insiders still struggle to admit and accept: We take every idea one, or at least one, step too far. Is it software as a service or is it the end of software? Is it a great big network or does the Internet change everything? </p><p>On this last point, I think that one of the stories of 2005 was that though the Internet enables a lot of things, it does not change reality itself. <a title="nick carr again" href="http://www.roughtype.com/archives/2006/01/the_oldworld_in.php">Nick Carr says as much in this post about the Old World Internet</a>. The Internet has not completely changed the nation-state, nor will it. Likewise, though the Internet enabled some of the commoditization of software, it is not going to eliminate packaged software or software as a service. In the same way that nation-states have ultimately written their borders on the Internet, the corporation will ultimately prevent open source from invading the application layer. As open source starts to approach the corporate revenue stream, corporations will not participate in the 'movement' by creating industry specific modules and functions and then leave these open to competitors. At the operating system level, application server level and, perhaps at the database level - though performance is a big issue here - the corporation is ok with open source because none of these layers really affect competitive advantage or the revenue stream. But the application layer is a whole other subject. So if the company keeps its open source application development closed then what we really have is just a return to custom development. Now this might happen because some CIOs would love to return to custom development, but I wouldn't bet on large numbers, not with IT budgets down like they are.</p><p>The open source movement was interesting at the beginning, but as time has gone by it's like the Sprint commercial where 'the man' says his new calling plan is his way of 'sticking it to the man.' Open Source has been co-opted now, the zealousness is gone, the Internet has probably done all it can to commoditize software, and the movement will ultimately stop at the doors of the heavily air-conditioned computer room</p> 9 application/xml false application layer database open source operating system software as a service Open Source is really about the Economics of Software http://www.roughtype.com/archives/2006/01/the_amorality_o_1.php The original article on open source economics http://www.onlamp.com/pub/a/onlamp/2006/01/12/no_oss_community.html?page=1 Taking open source one step too far http://sightlog.sightlinesconsulting.com/public/item/108390 Old wine in new bottles http://www.roughtype.com/archives/2006/01/the_oldworld_in.php Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.0; T312461; YPC 3.0.1; (R1 1.5); .NET CLR 1.1.4322) 68.79.122.138 68.79.122.138 tfoydel false true false false true 205861 false false true false false false true 102302 blog blogsite/SightLines/web