08.08.08
Posted in Microsoft, Windows, Mono, Security, Asia, Database, Corel at 6:15 am by Roy Schestowitz
Something that we had been looking for yesterday was finally found. It makes a pretty good description of a problem that will be discussed here briefly because it’s the nasty technique Microsoft used against Borland. It tries the same against Adobe. Possibly Novell, too.
Here is the article, which is just over a decade old.
Fierce competitors Microsoft Corp. and Borland International, Inc. have moved their battle from the networked desktop to the courtroom.
Borland last week filed suit against Microsoft, alleging that the Redmond, Wash., giant has been systematically recruiting Borland developers in an attempt to eliminate the company as a competitor. Microsoft and Borland are rivals in the budding Java and Internet tools markets.
[…]
The suit alleges that Microsoft’s Bill Gates himself sweetened the pot. Gross eventually accepted the offer, which included an additional half-million dollar bonus, last September.
A noticeably angry Borland CEO Del Yocam complained about the nerve of Microsoft. “How flagrant, driving limos up to the front of the company. That is what riles you,” Yocam complained. Yocam said his No. 1 goal is to get Microsoft to stop recruiting.
They seem to be trying the same thing with Adobe at the moment. India’s mainstream press reported on this issue a few weeks ago (previously covered here) and some months ago there were senior-level defections of this kind.
There are good reasons to suspect that the same thing happens at Novell [1, 2]. Martin Buckley and Dr. Crispin Cowan are better-known examples of this.
We recently wrote about staff intersections and warned about Ximian’s influence on Novell. Novell is now recruiting .NET developers, so there’s increased convergence. IBM does not seem too happy about it and Bob Sutor is has become more vocal about it.
My one caveat with it is that it either requires .Net or Mono. I’ve removed the usual Mono applications from my Ubuntu Linux installation and am somewhat loathe to put anything requiring it on the machine. (This is a personal choice, as I’ve mentioned before.) Anyone doing a Java version or alternative implementation that is open source?
Having watched what happened to Corel and to Borland, it’s worth keeping an eye on the way Novell resembles Microsoft. It will probably become more noticeable over time. █
“Our partnership with Microsoft continues to expand.”
–Ron Hovsepian, Novell CEO
Permalink
Send this to a friend 
View as PDF
07.28.08
Posted in Formats, Microsoft, Finance, GNU/Linux, Office Suites, Europe, America, SUN, Oracle, Open XML, Google, FOSS, Database, Mail at 8:07 am by Roy Schestowitz
In recent posts about the secret pains of Microsoft we had identified growing weaknesses in the ‘Cash Cow’ departments [1, 2]. Well, in the past couple of days alone, the same problems persisted. Here is just a quick roundup that serves as another sample.
Office Business
As new signs of future trouble, consider the strong new push in China for a Microsoft Office replacement. Citing Red Flag Linux, crtiics would argue it’s a bargaining card, but once you look closely, it doesn’t quite seem so. They bypass Microsoft at formats level and the software looks impressive.
Ren predicts that the UOF standard will be promoted in at least six ministries in China by the end of 2008 and then might become compulsory among other Chinese entities. This should ruffle some feathers at Sun, IBM, and Microsoft.
In response, Microsoft changes its proprietary formats again and makes them competition-hostile. It claims to have changed the legal terms though. This happened at the end of last week.
Expect more margin erosion as Microsoft fights back. In response to competition on-line and on the desktop (chiefly OpenOffice.org), prices continue to drop. Here is a new report:
“This is also part of our Unlimited Potential program,” added Rivera-Moreno. Microsoft’s Unlimited Potential is a global program aimed at helping the middle and bottom of the world’s economic pyramid of about 5 billion people, the software company’s website stated.
Microsoft will of course blame what it calls “piracy”, but it should be very clear what is happening here. Even in wealthier countries, Office and Exchange (along with adjacent layers in the network and stack) are gradually being replaced. Here is the latest such story. Now it’s the Telegraph’s turn.
Might the news that the Telegraph Media Group (TMG) is moving to Google Apps and phasing out Microsoft Office and Exchange be in future remembered as the end of the Microsoft desktop arm-lock? Probably not, but the stakes are so high that it’s worth a little speculation.
Databases
Microsoft recently called MySQL a “biggest competitor”. Watch this new article from The Register. [language warning]
Sun Microsystems is about to *** the database world, and nobody sees it coming. Imagine a SQL database that can support the absurd level of concurrency promised by HyTM. Conveniently, Sun owns one of the most popular relational databases in the world: MySQL. If MySQL on a single Rock based system can outperform Oracle or Microsoft spread across many systems, then DBAs worldwide would gladly tell Larry Ellison or Steve Ballmer where to shove it.
Direction
The departure of Johnson appears to be worse than it initially seemed. It was possibly fast and impulsive, suggesting that there may have have been something to escape, something to run away from.
Johnson’s departure from Microsoft probably abrupt
[…]
Remarks from Chief Executive Steve Ballmer at that meeting certainly indicate the move was a surprise.
There’s more to indicate confusion and lack of focus. From Friday:
1. Ballmer: Big Plans, Few Options
Ballmer was emphatic, if not frustrated. If he said it once, he said it a thousand times: A bid to buy Yahoo!, or just its search business, was off the table.
2. Microsoft may need an IBM moment of clarity
Microsoft could use some of that focus. It’s not that Microsoft is forgetting the enterprise business. In fact, Microsoft is hellbent on being the No. 1 enterprise software company. The problem: That enterprise windfall is funding things like Live Search and Xbox. I credit Microsoft for its willingness to invest and be tenacious, but you have to wonder about the returns here.
3. As other companies cut back, Microsoft keeps spending
His goal isn’t to cut spending but “to convince you that we are investing money wisely.”
They try to acquire rather than earn more and more sources of revenue. Savings may be down, but they need to impress investors to keep momentum going. The analysts don’t exactly buy that because it is not sustainable. Microsoft may be approaching debt if it starts another round of buybacks.
The inability to evolve and desire to evolve is showing. For quite some time now (no more than several years) Microsoft has seen some of its margins declining and it thought about transitioning to other sectors, including chip production. It seems like Microsoft has just been dealt a blow by the FCC, which turns to some other suppliers after Microsoft’s repeated technical failures.
An early prototype built by Microsoft failed to operate in the FCC’s lab. Microsoft later determined the device was broken.
The FCC is now testing other prototypes built by Philips and Motorola as well as Silicon Valley startup Adaptrum and Singapore-based Institute for Infocomm Research.
The Motorola device connects to a database of TV stations operating within 125 miles and scans the airwaves nearly every second for other signals that may pop up unexpectedly, such as a wireless microphone.
Music players is another niche that made Microsoft envious, particularly because these player soon evolved to become phones and portable computers.
Even Microsoft’s biggest of fans are outraged by their lies and inability to penetrate the portable music players business (dominated primarily by Apple at the moment).
We didn’t want to post MSZuneFan’s “last video” because of the hard language but we’re more than happy to report it now has been removed from YouTube.
There are some more details here.
You’ve probably heard by now that the infamous Zune Guy (”Microsoft Zune”) was so disappointed with Microsoft that he’s elected to have his ink removed in place of something more in line with his shifted priorities. In addition to the reconstructive work he’s going to have, ZG claims that Microsoft actually lied to him about his free trip to the Redmond campus, which (as you might imagine) further tarnishes his image of the company. Unfortunately, according to reps from Microsoft we spoke with, the trip was never confirmed — only discussed — and ultimately canceled due to the very reasonable fear that it might lead a lot of “hyper-engaged users” to expect a trip of their own (though they did hook our man up with a free Zune and some related swag).
For those who have not kept track of the lifetime (or deathwatch) of the Zune, here are some articles of interest:
Losing Cuba
Losing business at an enterprise level is far from the same thing as losing an entire nation. Cuba’s plan seems to be on track.
At a technology conference in February last year, the Cuban government declared its intention to rid itself of Microsoft software in favor of open-source alternatives. According to an Associated Press report, Communications Minister Ramiro Valdes, who opened the conference, suggested that Microsoft was cooperating with U.S. military and intelligence authorities, and he proclaimed that IT is a battlefield on which Cuba is fighting imperialism.
More on Free software and Cuba:
In summary, things are changing fast. One just needs to look closely. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend View as PDF
07.18.08
Posted in Formats, Microsoft, GNU/Linux, Standard, OpenDocument, Open XML, OpenOffice, Database at 1:24 pm by Roy Schestowitz
“It’s nice for you to admit your guys are running scared [of Free software]. They should be.”
–The sum of Microsoft’s fears
According to Groklaw, NATO has just adopted ODF as a mandatory standard. Pamela Jones adds: “No, I don’t see OOXML on the list. On this page, NATO explains the need for standards…”
More interesting, however, is the following job vacancy at Microsoft. [via]
Our passion is helping our field and partners win against our biggest competitors in this space, particularly OpenOffice and MySQL.
So there you have the explicit admission that OpenOffice.org is a “biggest competitor” to Microsoft Office and MySQL is a “biggest competitor” to Microsoft SQL Server. All in all, they are also “biggest competitor[s]” to Microsoft’s core business as a whole.
“All in all, they are also “biggest competitor[s]” to Microsoft’s core business as a whole.”Microsoft’s offerings are overpriced and they do not support standards (data is not easily portable, i.e. lock-in prevails). Microsoft needs people to persuade businesses to look away from Free software. Sounds familiar? It ought to (more here).
As explained previously, Microsoft prefers stepping over to rival territories. It’s seemingly doable when rivalry reaches only a minority and OpenLogic provides data such as location of business ‘threats’.
We gave an example of this yesterday. Remember what happened to XenSource after Microsoft had intervened. Here is where things stand today.
Tony Asaro, who recently joined Virtual Iron as Chief Strategy Officer, pointed out that the Xen technology is also the result of the efforts of others, therefore the results are not owned by Citrix.
Acquiring a virtualization company is easy, especially if you can pay an high price for it, retaining its community maybe a more difficult task, though.
Dissipation of a community is a nasty and anti-social strategy, but it’s not the only one in Microsoft’s books.
A strategy of approaching the feeble on verge of defecting will prevail as long as the whack-a-mole methodology is ’scalable’. But software of this kind (GPL) explodes in popularity, so Microsoft’s plan is hardly maintainable. MySQL is downloaded about 70,000 times per day and OpenOffice.org is reportedly downloaded, on average, 1.2 million times per week.
For those who do not keep track of the market, in today’s trading Microsoft’s shares are already down approximately 8%. In its previous quarter, Microsoft admitted that sales of Windows and Office had declined by as much as 24%. yesterday it reported other problems. It fails to evolve and Yahoo! may have just escaped its claws for good. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend View as PDF
07.01.08
Posted in Patents, Courtroom, SUN, FOSS, Database at 5:52 am by Roy Schestowitz
There is a heap of software patents news at the moment. Here is one thing we can do against them.
Since David Axmark and I started to work on MySQL we also took a strong stand against software patents. MySQL AB have been sponsoring several efforts to prevent software patents in Europa.
Now David and I are continuing to do this outside of MySQL AB.
[…]
If you are a philanthropist and if you care about open source software and don’t have a love for the current patent system, I encourage you to join us in sponsoring Patent Lens. You can also try to get your company to sponsor.
Interestingly enough, as Digital Majority wishes to point out, software patents can also be used as a FUD tactic, not just for actual lawsuits. That’s precisely what Microsoft is doing at the moment. Dillon wrote:
Developers are curious whether NetApp will be successful in hindering even greater adoption of Sun’s ZFS open source technology.
Therein lies the conflict between companies with encyclopedias of patents (portfolio) and Free software. Sun must adapt to the stance of MySQL, as opposed to the other way around. Sun’s and MySQL’s new relationship continues to act as a problem to the work of MySQL’s founders. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend View as PDF
06.21.08
Posted in Microsoft, GNU/Linux, Novell, Ubuntu, SUN, Oracle, IBM, Database at 7:20 am by Roy Schestowitz
This two-part post is worth reading carefully yet cautiously. We’ve received a lot of information from a credible source, but a lot of it needed to be omitted or at least watered down. What we have left below will be useful knowledge to return to in the future.
Let us begin with some timely news about corporate politics. A short while ago, after this short and mystifying post, Matt Asay wrote the following clarification about Red Hat and Oracle:
“I’ve since heard a bit more about this. There’s not an acquisition in the works, but Oracle is apparently pushing for some sort of partnership that would bring down the price of RHEL. Oracle doesn’t have much of a salesforce pushing “Unbreakable” and it shows. It wants to ride RHEL’s coattails but also wants RHEL to be even cheaper…so that no one will notice that it keeps raising its prices.
“So, there’s substance to the rumors. But will Oracle have the humility to give some value to Red Hat? The jury is still out….”
Oracle’s role has been interesting to us for quite some time because the company had announced that it would undercut Red Hat just about a month before the Novell/Microsoft agreement was revealed to the public (it had been negotiated for about 5 months before that). Oracle and IBM were probably among those who knew about it well in advance (IBM at the very least) and later we saw Oracle making some moves which can be characterised as strong-arming [1, 2, 3].
Remember that, going a few years back, Red Hat too considered buying S.u.S.E. Sun was mentioned in a similar context, but it appears to be sticking with OpenSolaris. It also maintains a healthy relationship with Canonical.
But… here are some other key facts of interest. It’s about IBM:
- IBM funded, at least in part, Novell’s acquisition of S.u.S.E
- IBM approved the Novell/Microsoft deal on the day of the press conference
- IBM has an extensive and ever-growing software patents portfolio
- IBM may be trying tame Free software, just like Nokia intended to do not so long ago (lingering questions remain about the new DRM ’solution’ for Linux)
- With Symphony and some other supposedly ‘open’ (as in standards) projects, it’s clear that IBM is not the biggest fan of Free software
- Some months ago it was revealed that IBM had been working on that dreaded thing called ‘Trusted’ Computing for GNU/Linux
- IBM is doing business with both Red Hat and Novell, on both the desktop- and the server-side.
The rest this story is reserved for the second part, which will be posted shortly. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend View as PDF
06.04.08
Posted in Microsoft, SUN, Virtualization, FOSS, Xen, Database at 2:02 pm by Roy Schestowitz
The article “MySQL Gives .NET High Five” comes from a biased source, but nonetheless, the headline can really turn heads given the apathy of Microsoft’s developer community towards this databases, which makes a digital fabric that competes against .NET, WS, and IIS on the Web.
There was a lot of head scratching at this year’s MySQL Conference and Expo when Microsoft was singled out for its contributions to open source development.
“Seriously?” one attendee was overheard asking during the keynote address of Marten Mickos, who was CEO of MySQL AB until Sun Microsystems Inc. acquired the open source database developer for $1 billion in March. Mickos, who’s now senior VP in Sun’s new database group, pointed to Redmond’s work with MySQL in naming Microsoft one of three companies to receive its Partner of the Year awards.
The above is far from an act of engagement, but what about the following speech where the bizarre acquisition of XenSource is discussed? And indeed, the question about a Microsoft acquisition is raised as well (transitively grabbing XenSource for Windows’ benefit).
The following are just a few of the many questions that the Citrix Geek Speak audience asked me during my session:
* Desktop Virtualziation - VMware VDM vs. Citrix XenDesktop.
* What do I think of Citrix buying XenSource for $500,000,000.
* Should Microsoft Buy Citrix? If so Why?
[…]
The video therein requires Adobe Flash to view. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend View as PDF
05.15.08
Posted in Microsoft, GNU/Linux, Patents, GPL, SUN, Oracle, FOSS, Interview, Database at 8:36 am by Roy Schestowitz
Increasingly, as MySQL grows mightier, it is likely to find itself under greater pressure. Part of this pressure is not a competitive one as much as it is pressure which revolves around loyalty. Balancing customer trust against the need for revenue can be hard sometimes. Loyalty to shareholders often antagonizes market requirements, too.
Another vector of risk is the relentless attempt to write and exploit new laws that essentially contradict the GNU Public License (GPL) and therefore sideline or exclude free software, of which MySQL is one. The bigger and more disruptive MySQL becomes, the more attractive a scapegoat it will be. To say this more explicitly, as MySQL attracts more customers at the expense of its counterparts, software patent trolls and vocal critics will more likely paint it their target.
From a public relations and legal perspective, it’s typically easier when you are an underdog because you receive sympathy. But MySQL is growing up, so let’s take a look at some new barriers it will probably face, or is already facing.
Another Storm in a Teacup
In order to better understand the sensitivity of the issue at hand, it’s worth recognizing the importance of MySQL. To many IT professionals, MySQL is a vital ingredient in their stack. It is the engine that organizes and stores personal data. This trend is here to stay, particularly because Web-based applications continue to gain traction. Just as people wish to control their data and escape lock-in, they also wish to have a sense of control over their database, i.e. the software which lies beneath processing, interpreting and delivering this data to other layers of the stack. MySQL offers peace of mind to many.
How quickly things can change though. Inaccurate news broke loose in Slashdot a few weeks ago, insinuating that MySQL was gradually going closed-source. The almost-immediate backlash, which was further fueled and exacerbated by a few sensationalist articles, played a partial role in convincing MySQL to keep the core of the program purely GPL-licensed, essentially backtracking on a decision that had previously been made. Above all, MySQL wanted to keep its users happy. It needed to cope with new types of pressure.
This rather fundamental strategic change was nothing new. Contrary to common belief, MySQL’s revised strategy had been adopted before Sun Microsystems even entered the picture and the company still intends to make some peripheral components (addons) of MySQL proprietary. It’s seen as controversial by those who argue that MySQL’s business potential could equally well be exploited using support and customization services, not sales of proprietary software. Interestingly enough, MySQL did not start off as free software. The same goes for the Linux kernel, which elected the GPL only in 1992.
This latest storm surrounding MySQL has died out by now, but it led me to some amicable conversations with Mårten Mickos, the CEO of MySQL, who is also a Database Senior Vice President at Sun Microsystems following the 1-billion dollar acquisition of his company. Selective responses from him are quoted later on, but I continue to reflect on MySQL’s likely direction with the open confession that I have bias in favor of the GPL’s merits and awareness of existing external threats to it.
MySQL’s Business Model Dilemma
MySQL is unique in the sense that it has become an almost de facto database for GNU/Linux-powered servers (and to an extent Apache also). This gives it an enormous, yet hidden, presence in the World Wide Web. It thrives in a huge userbase and can boast over 100 million downloads of the software so far.
“More recent attempts to change the business model saw a shift from introducing inconveniences to actual restriction imposed on access…”MySQL’s monetization of this success — as measured in terms of popularity or ubiquity — is another story due to its relatively low ‘conversion rate’, i.e. the number of users who turn into paying customers. The ratio recently stood at about 1000:1, which means that only one in a thousand users also becomes a paying customer.
Over the past couple of years, MySQL has earned itself some new critics for subtle changes to its business model. The latest incident, which was mentioned above, is no exception. Examples of controversial moves involve the availability of latest versions of the software and the state of the software which made is available (e.g. pre-compiled program versus source code). There was also a colossal case of misunderstanding last year when discrimination against Debian was wrongly claimed. Unfortunately, such misconceptions and errors live on.
More recent attempts to change the business model saw a shift from introducing inconveniences to actual restriction imposed on access, with the exception of paying customers who receive binaries. In essence, they must handle executable files without accompanying source code, which sometimes translates into lock-in and helplessness, feature- and security-wise. But it didn’t take. MySQL changed its mind. Sort of.
It’s important to remember that when MySQL announced its strategic reversal a week ago, at least as far as the core product is concerned, not much was changed as far as the business model goes. Only its scope was altered and impact thus limited.
To the company’s credit, it did listen. It did take feedback about MySQL into account after the backlash. By all means, it is preferable to inquire about controversial things — keeping users in the loop so to speak — as opposed to making quiet or surprise announcements. The GPL is all about giving users real control, as well as a sense of control over direction of development and whatever they do on their personal computers or servers. Distribution of binaries, for example, does not permit this.
Free software is still scarcely explored in the business sense, but many choose to think of it mainly as a question of control (open source), not just freedom. These two strengths are separate, but not mutually exclusive. One problem that remains with the aforementioned approach, namely the making peripheral components proprietary, is that it turns products as a whole into the equivalent of trial version of software where users get trapped in, then charged premium rates for non-free extensions which they cannot study, modify, or redistribute.
The situation above highlights yet another limiting factor, which can be used as an argument filled with substance against free software — especially software which goes down this particular route at the end. With dual-licensing, the software loses its distinguisher, its added value. For opponents of free software it serves as a fear, uncertainty and doubt (FUD) argument which may be stronger than “free software relies on support services, so it’s made shoddy for revenue.”
It’s possible to think of all sorts of ways to monetize use with minimal disruption and obtrusion. Some companies already do this with great success. I approached Richard Stallman for his opinion on this and he insisted that it is not just a question of profit. “I don’t think much about the question of what is more profitable, because I am constantly urging people to think about what is ethical and what is not,” he said.
Software Patents
Software patents are an odd duck because they are valid only in a few countries and their economic merits are repeatedly doubted. They typically serve an affluent minority. A controversial issue that came up back in February was the disappearance of MySQL’s rebellious policy on software patents. The acquisition by Sun had an effect on it.
Scott Mace started a big discussion at the time about Sun’s view on software patents and what it all means to MySQL. Sun weighed in, but nonetheless, a fairly brave Web page that protests against software patents did not return after it had been taken down. It has only been amended since then, in order to reflect on convergence or symbiosis of policies. Not everyone was pleased.
“What will prevent MySQL from getting not only further restricted — feature-wise — but also sensitive to software patent baggage?”It’s clear that large companies like Sun can benefit a lot from their patent portfolios. In contrast, how many software patents does MySQL have? MySQL inside Sun can make it an attractive target for patent trolls. Sun has plenty of money and free software projects living under the umbrella of large companies translate into less ‘community backlash’. Think about circumstances where they come under attack that’s akin to that from Trend Micro, as opposed to NetApp, which attacked the titan called Sun. What will prevent MySQL from getting not only further restricted — feature-wise — but also sensitive to software patent baggage? What prevents a company with software patents on database technology from finding ‘artistic’ ways to extract money from MySQL users, e.g. via Web hosts, directly from Sun, or even by approaching customers (especially large companies) and making secret deals, just as Microsoft did?
I approached Mårten Mickos for a comment and his take on this was as follows: “As long as we have software patents legally in our market, the owners of such patents may try to make money on them in FOSS environments, and some will succeed.
“Fortunately there are companies with patents that don’t use them in this way. I am not an expert on Sun’s practice in this regard, but my impression is that Sun hasn’t used it patents for revenue extraction from users or producers of free software,” he concluded.
To be fair, Sun seems to have used its patents only defensively in recent years (examples include NetApp and Kodak). The company’s CEO even offered to defend Linux using Sun’s patents. However, to an extent, it seems like a case of fighting fire with fire while at the same time trying to extinguish the fire by opposing expansion of software patent laws into Europe.
It’s very doubtful that larger companies like Sun will be willing to just throw away their portfolios and annul their software patents altogether, especially after heavy investments that brought competitive advantage. Simon Phipps insists that there is an obligation to shareholders, but by hogging they become not the solution and therefore part of the problem. This may also lead to a separate public relations problem.
As people from FFII might say, based on their extensive experience, a company’s defensive patent becomes offensive when the company gets weaker and therefore feels cornered. The solution lies in invalidation of software patents. To use an analogy, letting more nations have nuclear weapons to neutralize attacks or to counter-attack does not make the world safer. Disarmament does. At the end of the day, large companies that benefit from the existing (and very controversial) system can typically just offer crocodile tears whenever this issue gets raised.
Fighting at All Costs, for Cost
Adoption of free software is still hindered by several key factors. A previous article highlighted problems that tend to escape many people’s attention. A continuous change of laws, for example, can be used to harm free software’s legality or at least put some clouds over its head.
It has unfortunately become a political question. Look not for scientists’ opinions but look mainly at shareholders, lobbyists, lawyers, and lawmakers. It is usually them who call the shots nowadays. Government opposition to an anticipated patent reform, followed by another discouraging outlook further confirmed this very recently. Then again, some say this entire reform was pointless from the very start. It strives to eliminate elements that large companies do not like while keeping in tact the rest which brings benefit to them and ensures monopolization prevails.
The GPL version 3 (GPLv3) was intended to address a few of the problems that are associated with software patents. GPLv4 has already been mentioned by Richard Stallman, who foresees further potential threats to the four essential freedoms that protect and sustain the freedom of software. Free software ought never to turn into something which is neither Free (libre) nor free (gratis). Software patents laws are a great risk to this.
At the moment, MySQL’s CEO does not rule out GPLv3 as a future option and at least a consideration, provided the market matures and adopts this licence too. “We think GPL 3 is great (better than GPL2), and we will move to it when we believe that it is also well accepted among users and customers. Wide acceptance was the reasoning we used for moving to GPL 2 and that’s the reasoning we’ll use for version 3,” says Mårten Mickos. Sun has already made one component of xVM GPLv3-licensed (Ops Center virtualisation to be specific), so it’s apparent that Sun hasn’t any idealogical or fundamental resistance to it.
In summary, MySQL is likely to face issues that are associated with ways of extracting revenue from its users. Another largely forgotten issue is the increased pressure from the outside to extract revenue for collisions involving ideas, especially ones pertaining to algorithms. MySQL ought to ensure that it can keep free software as free as it has always been, but these challenges may not be trivial to address. █
Permalink
Send this to a friend View as PDF
05.07.08
Posted in Microsoft, Finance, Mono, GPL, FOSS, Database at 10:43 pm by Roy Schestowitz
It was probably a little hasty to say that MySQL remains open source (or Free software, with the GPL). That’s what many headlines state, but not so fast! As Matt Asay quickly pointed out, there is more to this story.
The core will always be 100 percent open source. The periphery…will not. Or might not. It depends.
Novell, which considers itself to be a “mixed -source” company, brings similar questions to mind. It already combines a lot of proprietary software for its clients. Then , consider some of the licensing issues that accompany its Microsoft deal. What about software patents? This possibility of dual-licensing no longer seems so far fetched. Will Novell take a similar route with SUSE Ballnux? Is it not doing this already? Here you have an analysis of dual-licensing as a tool for weakening or revoking the GPL. It’s worth noting because Novell betrayed the GPL more than once before.
Remember, less than 3 months later SUN announced MySQL acquisition.
This paints a summary of what could happen to a DL company even if nobody’s initial commitment is questioned.
* DL Company dies: what happens to the IP/trademarks/licenses?
* DL Company undergoes a change of control: what happens to the community?
* DL company sells/gives its open source interest to a third party…
Shouldn’t we have some sort of open source prenuptial agreement applying to DL companies and their communities?
In this particular context, think about control of projects like Mono or Moonlight and remember the lessons taken from Zimbra [1, 2]. When I corresponded with Marten a couple a weeks ago I was given the impression that they are still exploring possibilities of monetising MySQL a little more effectively.
Novell wants money, but trying to control GNU/Linux as a whole is not the way to go. It’s selfish and it’s harmful. There are other means, except support contracts, for extracting revenue from Free software, as Richard Stallman pointed out a week ago. Here is one new example of this:
Finally, do not expect anyone to do anything for free. Most groups wish to improve on their projects, but having “enough time” is always an issue. Be open to offering money, time, or resources in order to get your problem solved. Realize that for what you offer there may be a down side as well for the project.
Free hardware still has to be installed and properly setup. Money may be an issue because of foreign currency exchanges or because it complicates the individuals taxes. Offering people can be good, but realize that then the project will have to take the burden of training and answering questions.
Having good table manners is the key to working with open source projects.
This is also explained by Savio, who interprets and breaks down Marten’s explanation of the situation:
I’ve been thinking about this statement from Sun/MySQL’s Marten Mickos:
“There’s a difference between organizations that have more time than money and organizations that have more money than time.”
I coming to realize that OSS users split into three, not two, categories:
* A] An organization that has more time than money
* B] An organization that has more money than time but is used to getting what they need for free and is comfortable enough with OSS to rely on their own skills
* C] An organization that has more money than time
Making money from Free (libre) software needn’t involve making some of it proprietary. It totally beats the purpose and cause. It makes it non-Free software. Mindsets must evolve. Consider this good post from Matt Mullenweg for inspiration. █
Related articles:
Permalink
Send this to a friend View as PDF
« Previous entries ·
Highlight: Novell was the first to acknowledge that Microsoft FUD tactics had substance. Novell then used anti-Linux FUD to market itself. 
Highlight: Xandros let Microsoft make patent claims and brag about (paid-for) OOXML support. 
Highlight: Linspire's CEO not only fell into Microsoft arms, but he also assisted the company's attack on GNU/Linux. 
Highlight: Microsoft craves pseudo (proprietary) standards and gets its way using proxies and influence which it buys. 
Highlight: The invasion into the open source world is intended to leave Linux companies neglected, due to financial incentives from Microsoft. 
Analysis: Xen, an open source hypervisor, possibly fell victim to Microsoft's aggressive (and stealthy) acquisition-by-proxy strategy.