Slashdot Mirror
TheKompany's Shawn Gordon Responds In Full
1) Increasing user base
by truthsearch
"Your company's methods of licensing software seems very sound. Core components are open source while the end apps are closed for profit. That gives back to the community and allows outside developers to potentially create other apps with the same foundation as your own.
My question is simple: How do you plan on continually increasing your user base? Obviously there are many GNU/Linux users thirsty for solid end-user applications such as Kapital. But how do you plan on getting to current Windows users? Do you plan future ports of your apps? Or do you have an idea of how to get more Microsoft customers to move to Linux and use your apps (possibly a model others can follow)?"
Shawn Gordon: When we started 2 years ago we had one product in mind and a very specific goal. Since that time our products have expanded dramatically and so have our goals. Basically we are trying to provide developer software and desktop software on Linux, specifically using KDE. The idea is that you can't have critical mass for users on the desktop without there being some core software available, and you can't necessarily attract developers for specialized software and vertical market applications without there being a critical mass of users. By addressing these two ends of the spectrum we hope to get people on the platform.
Now something like our Kapital product doesn't initially make sense on a platform other than Linux because Quicken and Microsoft already have Windows and the Mac sewn up. However it is a way to entice people if it is running on multiple systems and they get all the systems for one price, it protects their investment more, but Kapital is currently KDE only and is likely to stay that way for a while but it does provide for another method of attracting customers.
When we started Kapital we were going to have Gnome support and even built the infrastructure to handle making it native for Gnome with a minimum amount of code; it's also one of the reasons the application has the transaction logic and UI code totally partitioned.
Now other tools and products like our database-oriented software DataArchitect and Rekall are written directly to Qt and will be packaged specifically for Windows and Linux in a single box, and when Qt3 is final we will also add Mac support in the same box. We are almost done with our Qt version of Kivio (which was how it was originally developed). Now Kivio is similar to Visio from Microsoft, and originally we hesitated to do the Windows support, but our price point is so much lower and by adding Mac support it becomes a compelling item for the end user. We will do a boxed version of Kivio, but Kivio itself is free (as in cost) so we are charging for the stencils and packaging in this case. We've had a tremendous amount of interest in something like this.
With developer software like KDE Studio Gold, which was always oriented towards KDE, a multi-platform version doesn't make much sense, but now that we've added the ability to build any type of C or C++ application, we might just do it. BlackAdder as a GUI IDE however makes perfect sense as a multi-platform environment (which it is) because you are developing Python and Ruby applications which are also multi-platform.
So the net result of all this is that we are trying to provide things that make sense that are multi-platform so people can say "Hey, this Windows upgrade blows, but my favorite software works on Linux too, so why don't I use that," and then also address the people who are already here and just looking for applications to do their work.
2) Question...
by American AC in Paris (toZIGm@snZIGowploZIGw.oZIGrg)
"Mr Gordon, Kould you komment on the klearly komplikated task of selekting produkt names that konform to kurrent konventions?
Kordially,
AAiP"
SG: Coming up with names is a brutal and terrible experience. We've had accidental names and well thought out names and names we thought were just funny. BlackAdder is the ultimate inside joke (well not that inside) since it was designed for Python and Python was named for Monty Python, but is also a snake, and BlackAdder was another British comedy and is also a snake (Phil Thompson, the author of PyQt and primary engineer on BlackAdder is British). Sometimes we use "k"s gratuitously, but that is mostly a holdover from when we first started. I agree that the 'k' and 'g' stuff for KDE and Gnome has really gone over the top now and we are just looking for product names from now on.
Our company name was a joke too. I was chatting on the phone with ne of my first employees about what we should call the company and I said "we should just call it 'The Kompany' with a K because we are doing KDE" and it turned out I was able to incorporate it. The upside is that everyone always remembers the name.
3) Why are you always talking about Ximian ?
by an Anonymous Coward
"In the past interviews I've read from you it seems to me like you always end up talking about Ximian. Do you see Ximian as a direct competitor of the Kompany? Are you concerned about Ximian's market share and strategy?"
SG: I've talked about them once or twice, ever since that Google ad debacle where Ximian bought our company name and some of our product names to point to their company, they've left a bad impression with me because of that. Prior to that I really didn't have an impression of them, they were a company in a similar space but with no competing products. Now of course we have our Aethera project, which is similar to their Evolution project, other than that we continue to be very different companies. I actually haven't seen anyone clearly describe where their revenue is going to come from, and now I hear they are going to make an open source version of .NET in cooperation with Microsoft.
So the bottom line is, we sell software, Ximian currently sells nothing other than trinkets like t-shirts and stuffed monkeys, but I doubt they make money on it. theKompany and Ximian don't compete at all, and Ximian doesn't have a market share that affects me. We are also self funded and have gone along fairly well for a couple of years now unlike Ximian who has raised huge amounts of money but with yet no (publicly) clear method of generating revenue from that. There are no surprises with us, you buy it and you own it.
4) Business models
by s20451 (s20451_at_hot_mail_dot_com)
"Following the attacks on open source by agents of Microsoft, claiming it's anti-business, there's been quite a bit of discussion on this site concerning business models for companies dealing in open source.
I am interested that your company does both open- and closed-source programming. My question is: How does your business model balance the benefits of open-source programming with the requirement to be a profitable software business? In your opinion, is it possible for a for-profit company to work purely with open-source, and sell support (or whatever)?"
and
5) Why not Open Source?
by ktambascio (kmt@po.cwru.edu)
"What was the reason behind the decision to make products like Kapital closed-source? Was it to provide a way of generating revenue? Or do you plan on using product support as your main way to generate revenue?"
SG: My opinion is that the support-only model only works in the corporate arket, and there isn't yet a corporate market for Linux desktop applications. We sell support contracts currently and have probably made about $200 doing it, so it doesn't seem real viable yet. I can get a piece of software on the shelves of a thousand stores and have people walk in and buy it. To sell support requires making software that isn't easy to use and requires hand holding and then tracking down people and talking them into paying for the support which has a nebulous perceived benefit.
The model of paying an annual fee and receiving all updates free of charge should also work for individuals -- but I wouldn't call this support, just an alternative method of purchasing/upgrading. We offer this for a couple of our products now and we see about a 40% subscription rate, so we are looking at how to expand this to some of our other products.
Our philosophy has essentially been that if it's infrastructure like our projects KDE-DB, VeePee, Korelib, etc then we make it open source because it's in everyone's interest to have it available. Some applications we do like Aethera and Kivio that are free, but will rely on selling value added pieces like plug-ins and stencils.
6) Promoting Ease of Use
by pgpckt
"My question related to how the Kompany can make Linux an easier product to use. Attempts have been made to make the product more user friendly, but Linux is still a product that requires more effort to use then most people are willing to exert. To some extent, this is even promoted by the Linux community, some people of which take the attitude that if you can't figure it out you're just out of luck. Perhaps documentation/tutorials are the answer? How can we make the process of going to Linux easier, including ease of installing the Linux OS, helping users find programs that will be equivalent to those under windows, and the like? How can us end users of Linux be more responsive to people who express an interest in Linux without scaring them off?"
SG: Personally I give Caldera a lot of credit for creating Lizard. Before that installing was not near as slick, but Caldera raised the bar and everyone suddenly jumped on it, but there seems to be another lull waiting for someone else to raise the bar again. SuSE has become my personal favorite over the last 6 months but it's still not as easy as it should be for the standard Windows crowd.
The flip side to ease of installation is the ease of packaging. We have built an automated process on our packaging server that can build for up to 10 different distributions at a time, but the set up takes some time and this doesn't include Debian. Let me use for example our Beta3 release of BlackAdder that just came out. The three files that had to be packaged took 15 minutes on Windows. It was 2 full weeks of one and two engineers making spec files, testing, installing missing pieces of software, etc., before we could finally get it built on the Linux distributions. We go to a lot of effort to make our software available on all the major platforms as possible, but it is starting to reach a point of insanity very quickly.
There have been endless discussions in our company and on various news lists about installers, and none of it gets around the fact that you have to pre-compile for the base distribution and that still may not solve the problem. Depending on your distribution you've got KDE in /usr, /opt/kde, /opt/kde2 or god knows where. For packaging everyone decided to make a new name for the directory between /usr/src and /RPMS, you've got 'redhat', 'OpenLinux', 'RPM', 'rpm', 'packages' and those are just the ones I've noticed myself.
We are getting to the point that we are seriously considering not supporting distributions that don't support the LSB. I've been very encouraged by SuSE's work in this direction, and disappointed at how bad RedHat and Mandrake are.
7) A question
by CMcTortoise
"I congratulate you upon creation of several pieces of software for the Linux market, and you have successfully blended open and closed source software; however, do you think you can be profitable in a community that sometimes rejects closed source projects? Has the fascination with Free/free software hindered your business plans or has the creation of Free code libraries/bases kept good PR with Linux users while allowing profit to coexist?"
SG: Lets consider the community as 2 groups -- those that would avoid closed source apps on a point of principle, and those that would happily use a closed source app if it met their needs. Today, the 2nd group isn't big enough to generate huge revenues. But, as the Linux community grows we think that growth is going to (mainly) occur in the 2nd group rather then the first - because of where those new users are coming from.
The first group may take offence at us exploiting their work for our gain. We hope that, by also contributing our own open source code to the community, we are paying our dues. In general what we make use of is infrastructure, and the majority of the emails we get are fan letters. Usually when someone flames you they do it from behind the protection of an anonymous post in a talkback forum.
8) OS Target
by frankie_guasch
"Are you focusing only linux? or do you think there is a market for:
- Solaris
- Windows
- *BSD
- other ..."
SG: We've been taking a more Qt centric approach of late. It is an old argument that Linux has to have a Quicken/Word/Excel workalike before users will abandon Windows. Another way of approaching this is to deliver the Linux applications on Windows. It will be much easier to get a user to move to Kapital from Quicken if they don't have to move from Windows to Linux at the same time. Eventually the user realizes they can move to Linux just by changing the OS, without incurring any other costs (as, for example with BlackAdder and DataArchitect, when they buy the Linux version they also get the Windows version -- they don't pay again when moving OS).
We've also recently signed an agreement to provide some of our products for BSD. If this proves to be popular then we will make all of our products available on BSD. Another advantage of the Qt approach is that there is much less to worry about for installation thus making more platforms much easier to support.
I do want to say that our more Qt centric approach is not taking away from our KDE'ness. We are building some infrastructure so that our apps continue to look and behave properly under KDE when they are just Qt.
Can I take this opportunity to solicit for a debian packager expert? We would like to add debian to our automated build process and offer direct support but we just don't have anyone in house that knows debian at this time.
9) Competing with open source?
by FortKnox
"How do you plan on competing on the linux platform with open source projects? Basically, why would I buy Kapital if I can use GnuCash for free? And if it doesn't do everything I want, its opensource and I can add it. It seems like a very stiff competition. How is your company planning on attacking it?"
SG: Comes down to the business model that funds the development. If GnuCash meets your needs then use it, but the investors putting the money into GnuCash are going to expect a return from its users at some point, we are straight forward about it, you buy the product and you own it, no strings or surprises. If those investors don't get that return then they are not going to invest in an open source project again. Will the GnuCash users stand up and be counted when the time comes?
10) How you spend your time
by Laplace
"Hi Shawn, I am very impressed with how hard you are working towards commercial Linux applications while still supporting the ideas of free software. I've noticed you on several mailing lists, and you seem to offer advice as much as you seek it. How do you find the time to run a company, develop software, and participate in the community?"
SG: Well, I've got a wife and 2 young children and I've played in rock bands on guitar and keyboards since my early teens, and I spend way too much time on the computer as you've noticed, as well as writing and recording music (typically progressive) and then things with the family like camping, sports, outings and such. I love to read SciFi and go out in our cul-de-sac and drink beer and shoot basketball with the neighbors. Until recently I was writing 3 columns a month for various trade magazines and have around 200 published articles. Oh, and I also have a job as an international male super-model that pays the bills.
11) Project Status
by djoham
"Hi Shawn,
First, I would like to bestow a heartfelt "thanks" to you and your company for all the wonderful work you do. Too often, you've had to defend yourself against the trolls who don't get economics 101. It's not often enough that I see people thanking you for the contributions you have given us. Thank you.
My question lies in the status of your projects. I'm sure some people here on Slashdot don't know about all of the software that you're working on. It would be neat if you could give us a status report on your projects as well as a brief summary of what they do and what we can expect in the future.
I'm especially interested in the integration of your work with KOffice. I know that you donated the base version of Kivio to KOffice (again, thanks) and I was wondering if you had similar plans for Aethera, Kugar and/or Rekall.
Best regards, David"
SG: First, thank you for your kind words, they are always appreciated. Well this is going to be a long answer, so I'll address your last question first. We already donated Kugar to Koffice some time ago. We had thoughts of Aethera in there and Rekall, but I don't think it's going to happen anymore for various reasons.
We divide our work into Projects and Products. The Products are our commercial offerings and our Projects are our 'free' offerings. I'll cover Products first and I'll do it in alphabetical order.
BlackAdder: This is a GUI IDE for the Python and Ruby scripting languages that runs on Linux and Windows. It is whole based on Qt and uses a special version of Qt Designer that we licensed from Trolltech. It has everything you need for building multi-platform applications with Python or Ruby, either GUI or Console applications. It's at Beta 3 right now with prices reduced to $49.99 during the beta period for a Personal Edition. The price goes up to $79.99 once the beta is over, which should be this summer. You get all the betas and the final release as part of your purchase.
DataArchitect: This is brand new and is a final 1.0 release right now, and is jointly developed and promoted by theKompany.com and Code by Design. DataArchitect is a powerful database modelling tool for Linux and Windows operating systems. Graphically create, administer and design your databases while gaining insight into their structure with the Reverse Engineering capability. Prices start at $39.95. DataArchitect is Qt based and you get Linux and Windows as part of the single price as well as free upgrades up to and including version 2.0 which we expect in September and will also have support for the Mac.
DocBrowser: This is actually part of our KDE Studio Gold Pro software and is a really great tool for research while developing C and C++ applications. We've integrated and indexed the Qt, KDE, libc docs as well as the 'info', and 'man' pages and support for html. DocBrowser can run as a stand alone application or integrated with KDE Studio Gold. You can make use of it with things like KDevelop as well if you like. You can find any class and member quickly as well as filter for a quick find of class and members. In this case you can copy include the string for the current class to the clipboard to paste into your code. Copy member name for pasting into your header file. For any class you also have a list of all inheriting members. This is at version 3.0 and is shipping today as a final release at prices starting at $29.95. You also get free liftetime upgrades with your purchase.
Kapital: This is our answer to Quicken on Linux and KDE. Currently we are in the 3rd beta and work is progressing, although we are a bit behind schedule. We are extending our free updates through the end of the year now. Kapital is selling at a reduced price during the beta for $24.95
KDE Studio Gold: As of today we are at Release Candidate 1, RC2 should be out next week and then we should be shipping the final version. There are two version of KSG, one is 'standard' and does not include the DocBrowser (you can buy it separately later if you want), the other is the 'Pro' version that includes DocBrowser. The price ranges from $24.95 to $69.95 depending on the version you get. KSG is a GUI IDE for C++ development. It relies on KDE to run, but will build any type of C or C++ application you like, there are lots of neat features, with some even neater stuff coming soon. Like DocBrowser, you get free lifetime upgrades with your order.
Kivio: This is our answer to Visio on Linux and KDE and is also our greatest risk/experiment for an application. In this case the application is free and you can buy more stencils from us, these cost between $5 and $10 each, but we are thinking of making a subscription program for them so you can pay one price and get whatever we've got or come out with. We have a collection of about 25 sets of stencils right now, and our new 'Elite' style is just beautiful I must say. We are almost done with a new version that is written using Qt3 and is running on Linux and Windows and it shares the same stencils. What we are planning on is making a boxed set of this with all of our stencils for $99.95 with both Linux and Windows binaries.
PowerPlant: This is our first product and it has been out for over a year now. The idea is that it is what we call a 2nd tier linux distribution aimed at developers. It is a collection of about 200 packages with languages, IDE's, databases, libraries, commercial demos and games from Loki. The regular price is $49.95, but during July we are discounting it to $14.95 as a kind of 'thank you' for all the support we've gotten and to celebrate the release of so many new products.
Quanta Gold: This isn't on our web site yet, or available till about the end of summer, but the authors of the popular Quanta web design software came to us and wanted to work with us on making a multi-platform version of Quanta that theKompany would sell. There is a lack of high end tools available for PHP and web development and we are excited to be working with these members of the Quanta team. Initial pricing is going to be $49.95 and the product will run on Linux, Windows and Mac. There will be more specialized plug ins available for sale electronically as well. Look for this in September.
Now moving on to our Projects:
Aethera is our PIM application which meant to address the space that Outlook and Notes address for Windows. It can/will use all kinds of digital information and will sync data with Palms or share data in a Groupware environment. Currently Aethera can manage MAIL (all mail protocols, contact manager, filtering) , SCHEDULER (todo and appointments using a KOrganizer plug in), NOTES (sticky notes), Instant Messages (Jabber plug in). The Jabber and Palm sync plug ins are commercial and will be available for $5 each. The groupware server interface will also be commercial, but prices have not been decided. As a stand alone PIM Aethera is GPL and free of charge, only pay for the enhanced pieces that you want.
KDE-DB is a set of libraries that will ease the development of database applications for KDE. It leverages the power of KDE Plugins to access the wider range of available free and commercial DBMS. It also provides a set of built-in widgets and dialogs that will boost your productivity in developing database applications for KDE. This is in a nebulous state now because of the new DB stuff in Qt3, but it looks like pieces would still be desirable, we are just trying to figure out how best to compliment it all.
Kamera is an IO slave and a KControl panel module which allows you to access folders and images within any digital camera supported by the gPhoto2 libraries. We donated this to core KDE and it is being kept up to date by others now.
Korelib is a cross-platform C++ library for developing plugin-based applications. It provides a uniform and consistent cross-platform API for developing modular applications. We use this in several of our applications now. Again Qt3 has something similar in it but Korelib supports more platforms and is GPL.
Kugar is an XML based report generation and viewer tool for KDE. Applications generate data in XML and specify a template (also in XML) to be used to format the data. The resulting report may be viewed on screen or printed. Templates may be specified as a URL allowing businesses to establish a centralized template repository. Kugar's implementation as a KPart means that the production of business quality reports can be easily added to any KDE application, and that reports can be viewed using KDE's Konqueror browser. We donated this to Koffice a while back. It is stable and done and available for use.
PyQt/PyKDE is the standard set of Python bindings for Qt and KDE. PyQt and PyKDE can be used to develop large scale Qt and KDE applications, or can be used to develop rapid prototypes in Python that are converted to C++ at a later stage of development. PyQt includes support for Qt Designer so that the same GUI design can be used to generate either C++ or Python code.
Rekall is theKompany's database product. It is a front-end to existing SQL servers, such as MySQL and PostgreSQL; it does not itself have any "native" SQL engine (in the sense that Access uses the Jet database engine). Currently, Rekall interfaces to MySQL and PostgreSQL, and also to XBase format files via a basic SQL wrapper library. The possibility also exists to implement drivers for non-SQL data sources, for instance data stored by theKompany's Kapital product. Rekall provides both the environment in which to design a database front-end, and the environment in which the front-end is executed, and allows the user to design and access tables, forms and reports. Table design is intended to provide access to features which are present in all or most SQL servers (standard SQL column types, indexes and so forth), but does not explicitly handle server-specific extensions. Forms and reports are structured in the normal sort of way, for instance forms can have nested sub-forms (and sub-sub-forms, to arbitrary depth).
Currently, there is a basic set of controls (simple text field, choice fields, and so forth), however, Rekall is designed to be extensible so that additional, possibly third-party, controls can be dynamically added. Scripting is provided using the Python language, with the ability to hook various events (user moves to new row, button is clicked, etc). Rekall contains a generalized scripting interface, so that other languages such as Ruby could be used. Forms and reports are stored either in tables in the SQL server, or in the file system. They are defined in an XML format, so in principal it would be possible to write a script which constructed and then executed a form or report (in fact, much of the table data display functionality is implemented this way). We are anticipating have the 1.0 release candidate available for sale at the end of August for a reduced price and the final version the first part of October. Expected final price is $79.95.
VeePee is a framework that makes it easy for KDE and GNOME application developers to embed the Python scripting language in their applications, and provides users with a powerful and consistent scripting environment. It is our intention to make use of this throughout our products as a user scripting environment.
12) My question
by MSBob
"Is the Kompany profitable? If not, when do you expect it to be?"
SG: I saw someone make the comment that if everyone that read the interview bought one piece of software we would be profitable that day, and that is true actually (so go buy something :) ). Well, we are self funded and have survived on some contracting and product sales for the last 2 years since we were founded. This is in stark contract to companies we get compared to like Eazel and Ximian. We all know Eazel burnt through $13 Million in a year and barely got Nautilus out, and Ximian has raised around $18 Million if I recall correctly and also have no actual products or services to show for it that provide revenue.
That said, a little investment capital would allow us to accelerate our already blistering pace of development, but we have a lot of things we want to get done and would like to do it sooner rather than later, and when I say a little I mean like six figures (if you're an investor feel free to call me :) ). I fully expect to be profitable in the next year, we run a lean mean operation and don't blow money on unnecessary fluff.
13) Let's Have Some Fun
by n3rd
"If you had three (3) wishes, what would you use them for?"
- SG:
- That my family has long healthy lives (that includes my employees who are like family).
- . theKompany is successful beyond our wildest dreams.
- To have Superman's powers.
SG: My opinion is that the support-only model only works in the corporate arket, and there isn't yet a corporate market for Linux desktop applications.
Christ, timothy, can't you proofread submissions! It's not like you're Taco or something.
Take with large dose of sarcasm and laugh at sake of AC whiner-trolls everywhere.
I wonder if Shawn will clue us in to what the sales numbers were for the day after this article has been giving him hits all day long. I just went over and bought my copy of BlackAdder. How bout you?
--Aaron Newsome
KDE is available to all the machine you specified and more. Heck - it's even available to 68k machines! (Atari TT, Amiga, etc), as well as others. I don't have the link here - could someone post it please?
Hetz (Heunique)
So how much time you wanted - a month?
If they find that a product doesn't sell well, or doesn't sell at all for a PERIOD of time (that can take a long time you know - it takes people time to find software they need - they don't find or see every software release) - then they'll release it as GPL..
Lets take Frame Maker as an exmaple - it's not being sold any more for quite a long time. Do you see Adobe releases the source? I'm sure there are thousands of software packages which won't see the light of day even if the product is discontued or deprecated...
So they actually are doing a good thing with this..
Hetz (Heunique)
Ok, then let me answer this:
.NET thingy. Rest assure that upon the first beta release that MS people will download and if the're will be a single patent infrigment - then Ximian will have a lawsuit waiting for them.
Imagine that you have a company which makes a product call ABC. Now, a company which is not a direct competitor of your product decided to buy this ABC word in Google, so if I search for ABC in Google - I see their Ad, and suppose that I'm clicking on it. Your competitor of course doesn't have any product that competes with ABC, but they got an exposure ON MY ACCOUNT. In business terms it called "potentional sales loss" just because of this childhood from your competitors (in this case - Ximian).
Now lets look at Ximian and what do they do. They are making the Gnome desktop with other companies and volunteers, which is very good for the Linux community, and no one argues about that.
But lets look at their business plan (or should I say - guess it, because they don't publish zilch about it)..
They claim they give services... To whom?
*) To Sun Microsystems: Nop, Sun got their own engineering working on Gnome and they issue their own packages. Sun, if they really want to, can sponsor the entire Gnome project within few days if they want to - but they just take a roll by assisting building Gnome on their Solaris OS, and by giving advices on the mailing lists.
*) HP - same as Sun, they issue their own packages (as well as packages of KDE) and participating in the Gnome foundation and on the mailing lists.
Both companies really don't need any Ximian services. They could ask Ximian to do a contract job for a very small amount of money (few thousand dollars, nothing more), but I can hardly call this a revenue stream..
Who else Ximian can offer services to? Redhat? they got their own programmers. SuSE? same. Caldera? they don't give a damn about Gnome at all. Mandrake? same boat as Redhat. *BSD? their Gnome maintainer has Quit the Gnome foundation and ceased doing any Gnome work (thats according to what I heard anyway).
What else.. Mono perhaps as a future services revenue? nice idea. Good luck competing with Microsoft on implementing the
Red-Carpet? now here is an excellent tool for updating. I have played with it and I must say - I'm very impressed. Real good work Ximian. Now there is the big question - Will users will be happy to pay the $10-$30 a month for a subscription service for using it? with my experience with the Linux community - I doubt that many will jump on it.
If I were in Ximian management then I would recommend 2 things:
1. Offer KDE packages. KDE is not a cancer, people want it and people use it, along with other Gnome packages. Give it to the people (not just the distribution security updates).
2. Call theKompany - Shawn has told with his answers that although they do packaging, it's troublesome to keep up with all the distribution. Ximian got professional tools for dealing with it and with dependencies problems, as well as they need Debain packages, which Ximian already do - a business deal could be made here and I live it to both sides to fill the details if they are willing to..
I wish both companies Good Luck.
Hetz (Heunique)
It was fixed few minutes later, and I saw the error on Konqueror..
Hetz (Heunique)
--
Why? There are many examples of rapidly-developed Free alternatives to commercial (or perceived "un-Free") software:
It becomes a matter of priorities. While there are some that swear by Free Software exclusively, most people just want something that works well. So the projects that tend to get the attention are those that provide some service that does not exist or that fix major shortcomings of closed alternatives. In either case, there has to be a large enough user base to push development forward. I can't explain gnumeric other than to note that it's a complex piece of software, but MySQL's scarcity of advanced features probably has more to do with the lack of need for such features for the average Linux user and the need for much more in serious server environments, which Oracle or DB/2 already provides, along with solid support and expertise.
--
Howdy. I'm a programmer for MontaVista Software. We sell "products" (which are really precompiled binaries and loads of top-notch support), and we make damn good money at it -- even in the present downturn. Our customers aren't end-users but companies doing embedded-systems development, and we do great.
Copyright can be interpreted very strictly.
"Isn't the open source/free inherently opposed to 'for sale' software?"
Sigh. This is such an old issue.
No, open source is not *inherently* opposed to 'for sale' software. In practice, making money directly from open source software is problematic, but that is a different question altogether.
Then give them the source code. Copyright law will allow them to fold, spindle, mutilate and otherwise experiment with the source code. They can reverse engineer it, make archival copies, modify for their own personal use, yada, yada, yada. But they will not have the rights to redistribute it.
This is not true. Copyright is the right to copy, it has nothing to do with redistribution. If you don't have the copyright, and the copyright owner doesn't grant you a special license, then you cannot make copies or derivative works, even if those copies are only used in-house. Just because you don't distribute it does not automatically make it fair use.
If you find a pamphlet in the street, take it home, and copy it in the privacy of your own home for your personal enjoyment, then you are breaking the law, because you don't have the copyright.
--
I bought the beta3 release of Kde studio gold and while it still had a couple of minor little bugs (none of which really prevented using it) it is a very good product. I tried kdevelop as well and I found it to be less usable than kde studio. kde studio has copied a number of useful features from MS visual studio and enhanced them. The only down point is they have a similar means of manageing workspaces and projects which I find annoying and unintuitive (very much like the MS ones).
Hettar
M&D Eaton
hettar@onepost.net
Hettar.
> Does theKompany believe that software should be Free? Also is that a reflection of the KDE community or a minority stance?
To quote from the responses:
Our philosophy has essentially been that if it's infrastructure like our projects KDE-DB, VeePee, Korelib, etc then we make it open source because it's in everyone's interest to have it available
Checking over at their website to see what they mean when they say 'open source' reveals that Korelib and KDE-DB are released under the GPL.
So no, they don't seem to share RMS' view that ALL software should be free, but rather the more common notion that some software should definitely be free and others areas left open for competition between free and closed and/or payware apps.
They seem to draw the line for free or for money at whether it is 'infrastructure' or not, which seems to be a reasonable definition to go by if you ask me.
That'd be LGPL :P
Maybe if Ximian hadn't pulled the rude trickery they did on google that Gordon mentioned, he wouldn't have the _admited_ bad taste in his mouth. Yes, what they did was technically legal, but that doesn't mean it wasn't rude.
I've read several interviews with the Ximian folks, and they act like they have polls up thier arses - no offense, but they have an attitude, just like many l33t linux users I unfortunatly know. I find it funny that people have no problem with thier attitudes, and yet complain when Gordon, who has been attacked and hurt by them in the past, expresses his dis-taste for them...
maybe if people in the 'community' acted co-operatively and didn't 'dis' each other all the time and pull stupid stunts like Ximian did and the gnome people and KDE people do against each other, we'd actually have some usable systems.
I manage a software development team. I used to be a 'prima-dona' programmer. It seems in the community egos rule and prima-donas are tolerated... but then people complain about how we have competing projects with horrible duplications of effort and GUIs that don't seem to work as well or are anywhere near as easy to use as the commercial competitors. Only comercial entities such as Sun/IBM perform usability tests and seem to care that the apps and ditros SUCK for average users.
This has turned into a little bit of a rant, but: when you are paid to code, the end user IS your boss. This is the lesson many prima-donas never seem to learn. I think parts of the community would benefit from a mass-pressing of 'the pragmatic programmer'
If I had two people, let alone two groups, of developers working for me who let thier egos get in the way like the KDE and Gnome people do, I w ould fire BOTH teams when they refused to co-operate.
Unfortunatly, it seems I'm a minority in the community, since I care about the end-result of the work, not just the beliefs behind the work...
man is machine
Service and Support is (or can be) a huge incentive to DO IT RIGHT. Example: suppose you write yearly support contracts. If you ship a shoddy product, you spend all your support contract money fixing the stuff. If you do it right, you collect all that money, and sit back with it, because you don't have to fix anything.
There was actually a court case where a bank made a calculation error with a spreadsheet package [Quatro Pro?]. Anyway they said the results weren't guaranteed. The bank lost the court case and lots of money. This is commonplace in software.
> Lets take Frame Maker as an exmaple - it's not being sold any more for quite a long time
This is news to me. I can still buy it from Adobe, and it's still the sine qua non for serious tech writing (MS word + distiller is getting more popular, but its master document support is still primitive compared to frame)
--
I've finally had it: until slashdot gets article moderation, I am not coming back.
1 - I'm impressed with the business model. Finally someone realizes that giving away desktop software doesn't make money. You either sell it or do it because you love it.
2 - I like that they give away the infrastructure and sell add-ons. This benefits everyone it seems. I do wonder what happens if competition pops up. I mean, what happens if I make better Kivio stencils than TheKompany? Do they continue to enhance Kivio and thus benefit me or do they break the infrastructure a la Microsoft?
3 - I actually hope they don't get a flood of seed money. There are way too many good companies that are ruined by seed money. It's like taking a strong young cyclist and pumping him full of steroids and asking him to ride the Tour De France. Some will adapt and survive while most will quit and never ride again. I guarantee that venture kapital will make working at TheKompany !fun. Growing a company is fun. Growing a company at the speed that venture capitalists expect is almost impossible - and rather painful.
1 - He's right.
2 - He's lamenting over the lack of funds available to his company as opposed to Ximian who seems to have a broken business model.
3 - Ximian should thank him for pointing this out.
Don't get me wrong. I like what Ximian has done and I love the whole GNOME project but GNOME != a business model. That doesn't mean it's not a great project.
Yeah, closed source is good and well.. but only if it can be run across platforms without recompiling. I'd like to see 1/2 the closed source linux applications run on my PowerPC, Sparc, or Arm -based machined. I do like some things about KDE for use by my mother, but for now I'll stick with my Gnome :)
It's apropriate that you should write this on the very day freekde.org launches. This illustrates just how wide a range of viewpoints there is in the KDE community, and proves the need for my new site. :-)
The service and support model is a huge incentive to ship shoddy shit.
A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
Yes. Plain vanilla copyright. Just insert the words "Copyright (c) 2001, J. Random Hacker".
Then give them the source code. Copyright law will allow them to fold, spindle, mutilate and otherwise experiment with the source code. They can reverse engineer it, make archival copies, modify for their own personal use, yada, yada, yada. But they will not have the rights to redistribute it.
IMHO, all proprietary software should be plain vanilla copyright, and all free software should likewise be plain vanilla copyright with the addition of a permission statement.
A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
The reverse works as well. You spend $50K for support, find out you don't need it because all the defaults are correct, it's easy to use, easy to administer, and does everything you need. Next year you screw the support, and just download it.
A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
If you find a pamphlet in the street, take it home, and copy it in the privacy of your own home for your personal enjoyment, then you are breaking the law, because you don't have the copyright.
I checked (US) copyright law again. I will apologize for exaggeration. I was in error. However, the law does allow for copying for archival purposes. The law seems to suggest that only one such copy can be made, though there are a few references in the plural.
A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
Qt is under a dual QPL/GPL license. This makes it usuable by any application under any open source license. It would be nice if it were under licensing that granted more freedom, but at least it has a nice symmetry (closed for closed, open for open).
The LGPL has a few niggly problems of its own, which smacked me right in the face the first time I tried to use an LGPL library for a commerical app on an embedded COFF system. Besides which, the LGPL has more ifs, elses, exeptions and caveats than most volumes of the Federal Register. We really need an LGPL like license that understandable by laymen.
A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
The new version will have a dual licensing model similar to TrollTech's Qt (GPL/QPL/commercial), thus allowing non-GPL applications (either commercial or under an OSI approved license) to use korelib.
This is a good thing to hear. Often times the community forgets that there are other licenses than the GPL. I have some BSD licensed apps that I would dearly love to port to Qt-Embedded, but I cannot do it without purchasing the commercial version.
A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
Why is corelib released under the GPL? Why not the LGPL or other license more appropriate to shared libraries? Will there be an option to purchase it under a proprietary license for those wishing the freedom to develop with it? Since quite a few KDE core applications are under non_GPL free software licenses (KWin, Kicker, etc), will they be barred from using KoreLib?
A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
He, look at my user ID, I killed Superman a few thousand times !
I then called the sales number, and guess who answered...Shawn Gordon.
I emailed them some suggestions for enhancements to Kapital awhile back, and Shawn responded to me also. Good guy. This is a company that listens to what it's users want. I expect that they will do well with their business model, the quality of their software is excellent and they are a pleasure to deal with.
Need Free Juniper/NetScreen Support? JuniperForum
It seems that theKompany's licensing system has gone to great lengths to show that theKompany does not believe in Free Software. In as much as theKompany gives the appearance of representing KDE (which I realize it does not) this seems particularly notable given that GNOME was created in part to make a Free desktop, not just an Open Source desktop.
Does theKompany believe that software should be Free? Also is that a reflection of the KDE community or a minority stance?
--Ben
Italicize the whole article, both questions and answers, and then suddenly switch to bold formatting about halfway through. Looks like the article posters make the same mistakes as us comment posters, and makes you wonder if there's a Preview button for articles. Hahaha.
What's your damage, Heather?
Yeah, having Superman's powers are great until Doomsday kicks your ass, or Imperiex kills your mom and dad.
(Boy, that latter was a bitch. But, somehow, I'm more upset about John Henry Irons' death. I'm thinking that the Kent's will turn up somewhere, whereas Steel is done.)
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
bzzzt.. wrong.
He clearly states that DESKTOP market will not support such a market. In the corporate world, it's a different game altogether (IBM still makes money supporting OS/2 for their corporate clients. Redhat makes beaucoup bucks doing the same for Linux in corporate environments).
I agree partially with your assessment: You can't make money on support and service, but with the caveat that you can't make money supporting the average consumer. I've always felt tech support was a money "losing" proposition, but necessary for the success of the company. See Dell's stellar service reputation (and see it get run into the ground by subcontracting). I can't tell you how many people bought Dell's for their reputation in service, which costs Dell money, but makes up for it in volume sales of actual product.
If only Microsoft would use a few of their billions to do the same...
If you were me, you'd be good lookin'. - six string samurai
I'd just like to point out that GNOME and Mono are not linked (insomuch as Mono is not part of GNOME[*]), so your assertion that GNOME is being sidetracked by Mono is false.
[*] GNOME is planned to be used in Mono, but that does not make Mono part of the GNOME project.
Ximian is not GNOME.
Just because Ximian is working on it doesn't make it GNOME. And I believe there are 4 people working on it at Ximian. GNOME is greater than Ximian, and if 4 people can sidetrack a project that incorporates many hundreds of people, then thats pretty impressive.
The GNOME project is continuing with or without those 4 people, so it is not "being sidetracked"
> There are many examples of rapidly-developed Free alternatives to commercial (or perceived "un-Free") software:
:-)
>
> * Emacs
That made my day. As any 5 years + emacs user how `rapidly developed' s/he considers emacs to be
yout post, to me, illlustrates one of the biggest differences between the Ximian/Gnome and Kompany/KDE/Qt camps: The latter has both a sense of humor and working code, the former seems to be generally lacking both...
"The future's good and the present is nothing to sneeze at." - Roblimo's last
I'm impressed - to the point of seriously considering the purchase of some software from the Kompany (when I next upgrade my distro - I don't think their products would install on the mess I'm currently running).
:-) but there is no one correct license and way to sell products.
I think the Kompany present an interesting business model (make the infrastructure free (the projects), pay for the software that uses the infrastructure (the products)). I'm sure that some free software zealots will throw their arms up and foam at the mouth
The comparison with Ximian is unfortunate in that it will probably cause a few trolls or flames, but it's an apt comparison - both companies are built around Linux software. It'll be interesting to see which of the two companies are around in the next 18 months (I hope it's both).
Would it kill the editors to read this stuff before they post? The italics are brutal, not to mention the bold italics later in the article.
Score another to CmdrTaco's merry band of illiterate shaven monkeys.
E/.
--
************************
************************
What, me worry?
Doesn't matter. You are not seeing an important facet of the retail customer mentality. They aren't going to buy it; they just want to know that it's available if they decide they need it.
In another life, I worked for a small vertical market software house. At first, the owner refused to consider selling software support or software maintenance packages. We wrote it, and we would stand behind it at no charge. Too simple.
After a couple of years, though, we needed the revenue and he invented the idea of selling S/S and S/M packages for reasonable costs. And guess what, our sales actually went up. Oh, not sales of the support packages; the basic software. People didn't want to buy support packages. They just wanted to know that such were available. Seems that almost nobody believed that they would get professional support for free. But if we said we were going to charge, then we must be legitimate.
Moral: they may not buy the options, but they won't buy the basic package if you don't have options.
End of marketing lesson.
Thanks for writing. I'd mod you up, but I'm writing in this thread so...
As for whether software is or is not a hammer, I think the answer is "it depends".
I normally like to write in certainties, but my thoughts are a little muddled on this point, so I'll ramble, and the reader gets to Deal With It.
I have modified Open Source software before. On a number of occasions in my career, it has been necessary to make changes to software to make it do interesting things.
I've never promulgated these changes to a master source tree. Nature of the game. The changes were often too specialized (such as letting Sendmail know how to identify the ESMTP response string from a brain-damaged piece of NT email-to-fax software we had to integrate, and send mail addresses to said software in a form the software could cope with, in contradiction of RFC 822).
The benefits of open source software in a case like this is clear.
Zero-copy cost is something I look on with extreme skepticism. This is meaningful if you're hacking in your garage (not to kick on people who hack in their garages. Lots of cool stuff happens this way). In professional situations, where people are billing real money for their services, integration costs generally dwarf licensing costs. This I've found to even be true for insanely expensive software like Oracle.
Reusability (in your words, allowing the end user to share with those who have similar requirements) has a place. My gut feeling is the further up the feeding chain you are (i.e. in the libraries and/or OS code), the more benefit you'll get from reusability. I haven't seen a lot of this when hacking end-user, or even "middleware" applications. Sometimes you have to hack the code, but frequently the problem really is unique to your circumstance.
And this brings me back to the original point of the message. When choosing which software to use for the job, the question a professional systems integrator should be asking is "what is the most effective way to deliver a solution for my customer?" If commerical product X is going to require tons of ugly external glue code to fit the job requirements, it's a bad tool. If Open Source app Y is going to require lots of custom hacking to fit the reqs, and commercial product Z requires less, ask what's worth more: your money or your time. And, of course, think long-term. Is this a one-off? Will the customer come back needing 10 more licenses in the next two years? And of course, is the customer willing to pay the up-front money to let you explore now in exchange for lower total costs down the road?
A very concrete example of this. A friend of mine needed to get a bunch of machines in an office hooked to an ADSL line. I told him there were two obvious ways to solve this: An off-the-shelf Cable/DSL router, or a Linux (or NetBSD) box with two ethernet cards, IP forwarding, etc. etc.
I told him that if it was his own network at home, and he had time on his hands, get some used hardware and consider the Open Source solution. You'll get much more flexibility, and you'll learn a lot about how networks go together and how technologies like NAT and firewalls really work under the hood.
Conversely, I told him that if a customer was paying money to have this solution put in, don't ever dream of doing this. SOHO routers are cheap, your time is expensive, and if you're trying to do something a SOHO router can't do, you probably shouldn't be doing it on an ADSL line in the first place (at least not in a professional capacity).
In design, and philosophy, I think people have the luxury of choosing many paths to get to the same goal. In design, the asthetics of the viewer (a soft and mushy thing if ever there was one) play a part. In philosophy, one draws up broad (and frequently subjective) goals, and creates premises to get where one wants to go.
I don't feel entirely comfortable with it. I believe in free software a lot more than I believe in Linux specifically.
I am not sure what to think about this...
There is a lot to be said for free software, obviously. However, insisting that your entire work platform be free (as in speech) hits me as being driven more by ideology than utitlity.
Let's take your example of databases. It is interesting to me from the viewpoint of intellectual curiosity to understand how the internals of a DBMS work. Although I haven't done so yet, I may find it useful one day to modify database code to have it do something Interesting.
However, when it's time to start creating product, I treat a database as being like a hammer. I don't care much how it was made, I don't care how it works. I don't even care (much) how it costs. I want it to drive nails into wood. If it does that, it's a good hammer. If it doesn't, nothing about the design process will make it into a good hammer. While a Free hammer could be re-engineered to work for my needs, I'm not in the toolmaking business. I just want my tools to work so I can do things which I'm good at and enjoy doing.
Conversely, there is no universal tool which handles all jobs. Oracle is a wonderful DBMS. If you're juggling hundreds of gigabytes or terabytes of data, there is simply no acceptable substitute. Oracle is also complex to install, fiendish to tune, a major resource hog even when it's been slimmed down, and the per-seat costs are stunning. I would never choose Oracle as the back-end for a message board or my at-home CD cataloging app, even if it was free (or Free).
j.
Hi Mr. Shirt,
Maybe he's just a tad miffed at Ximian's boneheaded cheap shot of buying from Google the keywords KDE, theKompany, etc. for redirection to the Ximian site. Ximian drew first blood - but I think Shawn Gordon is having the last laugh. In Ximian's defense, however, they definitely produce a very fine stuffed monkey.
They call me the working man. I guess that's what I am.
Go for it - the LSB won't do anything if there isn't significant developer pressure to support it. If everyone packages an LSB version plus "exception" versions for major vendors who still aren't compliant, the vendors won't have any incentive to switch.
You are incorrect. Our customer has the right to modify the code, they do *not* have the right to redistribute it. What the FSF needs to really point out is what the incentive is to write code that you never make money off of in any way. In reality most of the productive open source programmers are employed by a company to write the code, they aren't writing it during the day with no other source of income and living off of the good wishes of others. There is a reality to life that this utopian ideal does not satisfy
You know sydb, you've been bagging on us all day. I answer the phone and I respond to emails because I like to be in touch with our customers. I've got a good number of employees, and I work about 80 hours a week. I've been a programmer for over 20 years, and what has always really pissed me off is companies that don't answer their phones and don't answer their emails. So for as long as I can possibly manage it, I'm going to continue taking care of as much of this as I can. It keeps me in touch with my customers and they appreciate it. I have other things to do today, but it's important for people to be taken care of. You can think whatever you want of that, but I think people like it.
KDE Studio Gold is still GPL, we are just charging for it now, which is allowed (RMS verified this).
Yes, I sent the updates to the webmaster a while ago and he didn't do it, and I sent it again this morning but he is in germany and was asleep.
What you're missing is that in almost all circumstances the customer get's the source code, if they need to recompile on BSD or glibc they can, it's just that they can't redistribute those changes.
Here is my main problem. Using KDE Studio Gold as an example. Because it is GPL, I get countless emails from people demanding their 'free' copy because the GPL says that software wants to be 'free'. These people do not understand what the GPL means. It is an enormous burden dealing with these people, they become hostile, they try to attack our servers, they send nasty emails and all because we won't give them something for free. What bestowed upon them the god given right to get things for free? should they get a car, a house, groceries, for free? No they shouldn't. If it wasn't for the enormous type of similar reaction to GPL code we would use it much more often, but there is way too much of a misunderstanding and we don't have the bandwidth to fix it.
Oh, I think you have vastly underestimated the power of debian developers. They are invulnerable to Kryptonite and can code the crazy.
The current Slashdot moderation system is made by gay communists!
Oh gee how evil of them to advertise.
If these google words are such an amazingly great commodity, why didn't the Kompany register them themselves. Sounds like the management doesn't know much about marketing, etc.
The current Slashdot moderation system is made by gay communists!
Yes, they try and make money from software... you're point is...??
-----
"Goose... Geese... Moose... MOOSE!?!?!"
Higher Logics: where programming meets science.
Because they write open source software.
-----
"Goose... Geese... Moose... MOOSE!?!?!"
Higher Logics: where programming meets science.
Sure all this is a great thing.
But.
Surfing the warez sites in search of and downloading any of the theKompany products will be one of the things i'll hate myself for doing.. but if their stuff really is way better than GPL alternatives that's what i will have to do. Even $25 blasts a sizeable hole in my monthly income, here in Russia, where all significantly popular closed-source products are sold at the same price as OpenSource/GPL-ed ones (i.e. on the price of CD carrier - about $3 per CD, AutoCAD, Win2000 Server, name it, and a CD typically holds 10-30 products sharing the same niche (i.e. a DTP cd holds about 10 Adobe products, Quark XPress (several versions), font collection and some minor utilities).
(yep, no one in their right mind (with average income) will purchase anything for personal use from a legal vendor, with the exception of local game developers respected here)
No choice - we here either hurt Linux or develop GPL alternatives, if we have time. Way too bad.
Maybe some region-specific prices are possible?
Many of us truly respect the efforts Shawn and his kompany are taking in promoting Linux, even if that's not their primary goal, but we really have little choice.
./lxnt
Ashamed? On a web page with four items?
People like the monkey. It's cute. It's a mascot. So we sell those, and t-shirts along with the CDs. Why do we sell them? Well, we gave out a few at LWE and COMDEX, and the next week got around a hundred mails a day asking "I didn't get one when I was there, can I have one now?" So we started selling them. It's not a big deal, it promotes our brand, and people like it.
Plush monkey sales are not, however, the business model. Our path to profitability involves consulting work and network services, and has already generated substantial revenue streams for Ximian. No, I'm not naming names, that would be impolite.
a.
call this Monkey 'Miguel' and it will be selling like hot cakes.
As an owner of a Ximian stuffed monkey, I must say it is one of the finest stuffed monkeys money can buy! Also, it fits nicely on top of my monitor, along with several variations of stuffed Tuxes. :-)
It seems like he would have picked someone more powerful than superman.
I mean come on, superman even has a weakness, some of us don't.
The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. - Benjamin Franklin
1.) Developing applications which will remain closed-source forever, even with free updates after the initial purchase, still creates a situation of lock-in due to the nature of binary code. For example, if a customer buys a program which 4 years down the road is 'discontinued,' what will happen when a new glibc comes out or the customer decides that one of the BSD's better suits their needs? It's not practical for the software company to keep up with fixing old software for new compatibility, so a support/profitability conflict arises. Instead, why not let the cutting edge release be closed for a time but open all older versions under full GPL, perhaps even setting up a seperate non-profit group to coordinate it or finding a maintainer among the community. Once a product has been developed to its full potential, turn it loose and find a new market. I would be much more inclined to buy a piece of software if I had promise that it would be opened say 1 year after the purchase. That way I would be directly funding the development of quality Open Source while also meeting my immediate needs at a much reduced cost compared with competing products.
2.) Despite its popularity among hackers and academics, the Open Source movement has not yet reached critical mass in terms of everyday desktop applications which will draw further developers. Once this happens, I expect to see many businesses and even savvy home users realize the enormous savings in community software development and ditch commercial software entirely. I believe this economic breaking point will be when existing GPL software is close enough to meeting needs that it is cheaper for businesses to invest a small amount on adding the remaining needed features than to license a completely seperate commercial package. It may take awhile for the large companies to grow wise to this, but small, intelligent companies much like theKompany will be quick to jump on these new opportunities. This is another reason I believe that if Open Source software companies are to exist in the future (that is if they are needed), they must use a model of "plant a product for a price but give it up once the roots have grown." Then once the big dumb companies finally realize what's going on, there will finally be a market for Open Source support services.
Either way, I wish theKompany the best of luck with for the future and I'll certainly be checking out KDE Studio Gold if KDevelop doesn't meet my needs.
I recently purchased the KDE Studio Gold from the Kompany. It is good, and users are kept in the know about the products status and encouraged to submit bugs encountered.
What impressed me the most however was when I ordered the product. Before I ordered I sent a message asking technical questions about distros supported, kernel versions, gcc etc. I expected an answer sometime the next day, as it was Sunday. I got a message back in about a half an hour, telling me what I needed to know. I then called the sales number, and guess who answered...Shawn Gordon. He seems like a cool guy, and we had a laugh about how the last time the Kompany was on Slashdot, how his servers slowed down, (didn't crash -- they are running Linux, remember :) ), and how he was on vacation at the time etc. He even let me know if I waited a week, I would get RC1, but also let me know that I am covered for upgrades forever (which I knew) when I bought.
They seem to have a *clue* about the community, and are pleasant to deal with. Just thought I should share the info...
Usually when someone flames you they do it from behind the protection of an anonymous post in a talkback forum
sarcasm
You guys suck. Your products are crap
/sarcasm
Actually, while I've never used any of your products I think that your business model is a very sound one and hope it works well for you so that more companies can see that Linux is a viable OS for making money on, and there are ways to contribute to the Open Source comunitty, while still being able to turn a profit on some of your software.
It's also sold on ThinkGeek.
--
Wooden armaments to battle your imaginary foes!
Please grow up sydb. You speak of the GPL like it is the constitution, it's not. It is not even a definitive example of "free" software. There are many different notions of what makes software "free", the GPL is but one of those. Some would argue that the BSDL is more "free", because it allows anyone (including corporations) the same and complete freedoms. I agree with this, you don't. Tough.
They can do whatever they want with their code, when you're the one writing the software, you can decide to GPL it and make nothing off it. Meanwhile, those of us that live in the real world and realize that people can't work for nothing, and that money is required to survive, will buy the product because it's a quality product. It's the bigots like you that keep holding Linux back and driving companies away from it. They aren't using GPL'd code and refusing to release the modifications, they aren't violating the GPL, just because they intend to make money off their hard work doesn't make them evil.
It's amazing to me that you cannot see this.
Matt
Don't take life so seriously; it isn't permanent.
Please stop resorting to insult.
... passion you speak with. This I respect, while I use the BSDL for the few things I write, I respect the GPL because that is what the author of the software has chosen to use. It really is that simple. Respect the license people choose to use for code they write from scratch. I use all kinds of software with all kinds of different licenses, and despite my disagreements with closed source software (for practical reasons though, not political), I respect that choice.
I honestly meant that as a request, not an insult, but I could have worded that better, fair enough.
I don't mention the GPL at all in my post. I was talking about Free Software, and the four
freedoms guaranteed by it. I know it's not the constitution. Why do you draw a comparison?
Alright, the GPL was not directly quoted, however when people speak about "Free Software" (in caps, and in this manner), more often than not they're speaking about the GPL. Whose definition of Free Software are you using when you speak of the "four freedoms guaranteed by it" ? I personally believe that Free should mean Free, as in being as unrestrictive as possible. Does Free mean it's "encroachment" for a company to write, from scratch, proprietary software that uses an open source framework such as KDE? By the same token, is it wrong to write an open source GPL application that runs under the Win32 environment? (See VirtualDub).
I draw the comparison to the constitution because of the way you speak of the "four freedoms" and the
In the end, it comes down to this. A company is writing software from scratch that uses KDE. It will be closed source however, in compliance with the GPL, any modifications to the underlying framework will be contributed back to the community. What is wrong about this? In my opinion, this is an ideal situation for Linux and the GPL; the framwork gets enhanced by commercial work contributed back to the community, Linux gets some much needed software. It's almost a certain reality that the Linux, and indeed the BSD, etc, platforms will not expand that much in the desktop market until there is software that can compete with what Microsoft puts out.
I am against the encroachment of the proprietary into the Free Software community. I don't mind people making money. You don't seem able to differentiate the two.
Correct me if I'm mistaken, but are you not saying that while it's okay to make money off support, services, etc, it is somehow less moral to make money off actual software code, or in this case, closed source binaries? I'm glad that you promote the use of Linux in companies, however I fail to see why you are so opposed to this.
Matt
Don't take life so seriously; it isn't permanent.
The FSF's definition. This is not the same as copyleft. I support copyleft with more vigour than non-copyleft Free Software because it promotes more vigorously the growth of the pool of Free Software, and fights against the growth of proprietary software.
The FSF definition did not even occur to me in this discussion, it should have, I apologize for that oversight. I understand what you mean about copyleft, however I do not feel that fighting the growth if proprietary software is the appropriate thing to do. I agree that Free (as in beer, speech) software is definitely better for consumers as a whole than proprietary software, I'd rather have a good proprietary piece of software than nothing at all.
If Microsoft Office came out for Linux (et al), and worked at least as well as it does on Windows, I'd buy it in a second because I'd finally be able to stop using Windows all together then. I know that there are alternatives out there, but when you consider that my University requires the use of Microsoft Office for assignment submissions, I can't afford to lose marks based on a poor conversion job done by other software. So I use it, and it makes sure that Windows is always on my hard drive for the time being. This is unfortunate, but for now, it's reality.
I am opposed to the increasing introduction of proprietary software into Linux because it diverts attention from what I see as the goal in hand - the growth of the Free Software community.
Well, I'm a FreeBSD user myself, however it was Linux that I started on and that introduced me to Free Software idea, thus I always get a smile when I hear about Linux being taken into a company replacing Microsoft Windows computers, etc. That's good for all of us, no matter what OS we happen to use. If proprietary software on Linux helps users migrate from Windows, then I think it's a good thing. It would be better if it was open source software, but for now, I'm willing to put that aside in the name of community growth.
I hope you understand where I am coming from, even if you don't agree with me. Perhaps I am mistaken in trying to persuade people who just won't be convinced (at least for the time being...). However, I hope people won't blame me for standing up for something I believe in.
I do understand where you're coming from, I just disagree with parts of it. Soceity includes corporations too, and I do think that proprietary software can benefit soceity as well, albeit not as much as Free software. For what it's worth, I respect that you stand up for what you believe in, far too many people don't do that.
Matt
Don't take life so seriously; it isn't permanent.
Let me first say that I wish TheKompany the best of luck. I'll probably end up buying some of these apps.
Having said that: while I think it's great that they're producing these apps for Linux, I don't feel entirely comfortable with it. I believe in free software a lot more than I believe in Linux specifically. I'm concerned that the availability of high-quality commercial office applications for linux will impede the already-slow development of free software alternatives (e.g. gnumeric.)
The same thing has happened in (e.g.) the database market -- I bet that MySQL would have transaction support by now if DB2/Oracle hadn't been released for Linux. I'd be a lot happier buying a copy (CDROM/download) of software that gave me the four freedoms once I've bought it. Or if there were some guarantee that while you've got to pay to get most current version, it will be made available under a GPL/Apache-style license a couple of years after its initial release. I guess what I'm trying to say is that I would rather support a business model that ensured a fair revenue stream for the developers AND ensured that the amount of available free software increased over time.
Let the flames begin.
"There is no night so forlorn, no mood so bleak, that it cannot be infused with pleasure by tender meat..." - R.W. Apple
I have one pressing question, and a follow-up, that may determine whether I buy any products from theKompany. If you had Superman's powers, would you:
a) help Superman keep crime under control, or
b) battle Superman (and, indirectly, Linus) for world domination?
If you answered b), do you understand that the only way to defeat Superman, given equal powers, would be through some outside influence, and that, considering Superman's friends, one Debian developer probably won't give you the advantage you need?
Seriously, though, thanks for some great apps!
I'm hoping someone familiar with TheKompany and KDE Studio can answer a few questions for me.
From my understanding, KDE Studio used to be fully open source, but they stopped releasing that version with 2.0.
Now they have KDE Studio Gold, a commercial version at what seem to be reasonable prices. I have absolutely no problem with commericial software and commercial open source software. My question is, is KDE Studio Gold still open source? (not as in free FTP download but source included with purchase). From my understanding TheKompany has every right to take their old Open Source code, and since they own the copyright for everything, release it as a commercial product with no code available.
Can someone please tell me what it is they did?
Also, it would seem their web site needs a little work... the KDE Studio page talks about pre-ordering the software in February 2001.
"The universe seems neither benign nor hostile, merely indifferent." --Carl Sagan
I must say... the wishes are kinda lame.
I was half expecting him to wish for more wishes, have godlike strength/power/intelligence, use an einstein quote, or say he likes everything the way it is....
(Yes i did use bold and italics to make fun of the bad format of the article)
--
Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
(Use the Preview Button! Check those URLs! Don't forget the http://!)
From story submit:
(You must preview once before you can submit)
Or maybe they just like bold and italics?
Huh? Read the article, the Kompany make closed source i.e. proprietary software.
Yes, they contribute open source i.e. free software too, but their focus is on making cash from binaries.
Yours Sincerely, Michael.
Yes, lack of nebulosity in business plans is precisely what attracts me to the Linux, GNU, Free Software world. Not.
If they are making cash out of binaries, how can you call them an Open Source Outfit?
I'm sure I'll be modded as a troll. Oh well, that's what I get for posting in KDE related news items...
Yours Sincerely, Michael.
Only if your revenue depends on restricted distribution.
2: No, Redhat is not an example of a working software development business model. Redhat lives on selling other peoples work (nothing wrong with that, they have choosen to give it away), they are not developers (as their major business anyway). These people are developers and must make a revenue on the products they develop.
Sure. Alan Cox (alan@redhat.com) isn't a developer.
Sometimes I wonder why people open their mouths about open source / free software when they quite clearly have never read either the OSI or FSF web pages. It's quite astounding.
Yours Sincerely, Michael.
My point: No, they can't.
Yours Sincerely, Michael.
Sorry, I neglected to consider that the term 'Open Source Outfit' (O.S.O.) is one which you invented and thus you have sole control over the definition.
According to that definition Apple is an O.S.O. Others would disagree, though they might recognise that Apple has been involved in 'Open Source'. I'd contend that the larger part of their involvement has been appropriation.
Of course, there is really no such term as Open Source Outfit in general usage.
The generally accepted definition of Open Source includes rights of modification and redistribution. The Kompany's stated business plan is to make money by selling software where the end user has no right of modification and redistribution. I call that kind of company proprietary. The goal of the Free Software Movement for the last fifteen years is to move away from this outdate, inefficient, exploitative model.
Yours Sincerely, Michael.
That's because the Kompany is a proprietary software company.
I don't like it, you don't like it. The strange thing about this story is the number of people who seem to understand the need to modify code and distribute modifications (fix and submit patches) but don't care about the Free Software Definition.
Yours Sincerely, Michael.
Thanks for saying so eloquently that which I could not find the words to say myself.
And sorry about your karma, in advance.
Yours Sincerely, Michael.
See the logical AND in my statement. I am correct.
The FSF doesn't advocate never making money. They state specifically on their web site that they think it is good to make money from Free Software. Obviously you can't rely on the 'charge for a license to run the code' method. Hence the 'experimental' business models we see, which you do not espouse. That's fine, if you don't want to be part of the experiment, you won't be part of my desktop.
The 'reality to life' that you mention... may I humbly suggest, without the intention of causing offence, that this is short term greed? A bad thing, in my own book. The point about being human, and having intelligence, is that we can (at least try to) rise above this.
Yours Sincerely, Michael.
And no, it's not a KDE thingy - lets look at Ximian with Red-Carpet. What if Ximian tommorow decides to start making money from their service (and trust me - they will, they are after all, a commercial company). If Red-Carpet will be able to manage my 400 Linux machine with all the securities update - then rest assure that I'll be among the first people to sign a service contract with them...
You don't understand, though you say it yourself. Ximian will charge for services whilst the user retains his four free software freedoms. The Kompany, on the other hand, charge for a license to run and modify the code. You may not redistribute. They are proprietary
Kapish?
And the incentive for Ximian to improve the code will lie in it's incentive to get more people to pay for the service of receiving it quickly and effectively.
Yours Sincerely, Michael.
Please stop resorting to insult.
You speak of the GPL like it is the constitution, it's not.
I don't mention the GPL at all in my post. I was talking about Free Software, and the four freedoms guaranteed by it. I know it's not the constitution. Why do you draw a comparison?
Tough.
Whatever. Read my post properly before you gloat with false achievement.
It's the bigots like you that keep holding Linux back and driving companies away from it.
Hardly. I do whatever I can do introduce Linux not companies. I have paid cash for several distributions. I don't really care about companies who make money selling proprietary software, but I think that's obvious from my posts. I am against the encroachment of the proprietary into the Free Software community. I don't mind people making money. You don't seem able to differentiate the two.
Yours Sincerely, Michael.
Woops.. Typo!
I do whatever I can do introduce Linux not companies.
should read
I do whatever I can do introduce Linux into companies.
Yours Sincerely, Michael.
The FSF's definition. This is not the same as copyleft. I support copyleft with more vigour than non-copyleft Free Software because it promotes more vigorously the growth of the pool of Free Software, and fights against the growth of proprietary software.
Correct me if I'm mistaken, but are you not saying that while it's okay to make money off support, services, etc, it is somehow less moral to make money off actual software code, or in this case, closed source binaries?
Yes, I think it's less moral to make money off closed source binaries.
That's because there is more to be gained for society as a whole by the distribution of 'open source', Free Software.
As far as I can tell, that's what morals are all about - the benefit of society (or perhaps "life", or "intelligence", or "sentience"; some might say "the universe" - here's where I think the worthwhile argument is) as a whole.
I'm glad that you promote the use of Linux in companies, however I fail to see why you are so opposed to this.
I like Linux a lot. I think it's great that the community can be so close to the development of serious software and I get excited watching the pace of development. I also think most of the people in the community which has grown up around it are intelligent, interesting people. However, I wouldn't be so passionate if the licensing was different, and neither do I think it would have taken the geek community by storm in quite the way it has.
I am opposed to the increasing introduction of proprietary software into Linux because it diverts attention from what I see as the goal in hand - the growth of the Free Software community.
I hope you understand where I am coming from, even if you don't agree with me. Perhaps I am mistaken in trying to persuade people who just won't be convinced (at least for the time being...). However, I hope people won't blame me for standing up for something I believe in.
Yours Sincerely, Michael.
Your first error is in applying the service and support revenue model to a proprietary development model.
You should be applying it to a distributed development model where the development overheads are shared between a number of parties: end-users and other service and support companies.
Your second error is in assessing the market for service and support as small.
I work for a medium sized company (2000 staff). My employer spends over 1.5 million USD on software maintenance (i.e. service and support) every year. Granted, this is spread across a number of suppliers, but even given this, it is not a small sum of money.
Your third error is in the shallowness of your argument.
You make sweeping statements like "they are simply wrong" and you dismiss the service and support market as "way too small" without any sort of logic or evidence to back the statement up.
Your fourth and final error is in your lack of imagination.
You seem enthralled to the status quo; you fail to understand that change is normal and markets are dynamic.
Yours Sincerely, Michael.
well said
It shocks me that someone can moderate the parent of this thread as flamebait! Is it because he is obviously angry?
IMO the poster's remarks are dead on target. What is the point of having an open source/free software movement if the only answer is that you can take the free stuff, add your secret code, and release? That sucks!!!What especially irks me is the idea that The Kompany releases some code and hides the rest. That's not giving back. I like GNU/Linux as much as the next guy, but not at any cost. If it propritary extensions become acceptable (or god forbid the norm) in our community what have we achieved?
gawk, gcc or gcal don't seem to have a Gnome interface. And I couldn't find kawk, kcc or kcal anywhere on my hard-disk either ...
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
I saw someone make the comment that if everyone that read the interview bought one piece of software we would be profitable that day
And seriously, what world do these people live in? I mean Kapital is great, but its hardly "Venus in Furs." Shangra-la-management types hould die now. Peace!
Some of us have fallen in love with the notion of giving without reserve-Raoul Vanegiem, Revolution of Everyday Life
Rebuttal.
--------
Bleah! Heh heh heh... BLEAH BLEAH!!! Ha ha ha ha...
You know, I thought the rest of the article was a good read, but this sort of nonsense is totally unnecessary. These sorts of passive-aggressive digs at the competition really do nothing for the linux advocacy cause as a whole.
That's not even to say I disagree with him that Ximian's got to do more than just promote themselves as an entity. Still, if Ximian and theKompany don't even compete, why make fun of them? All you do is get to tally one next to your name on the flamage score sheet, all the while alienating the fans of Gnome who might otherwise have wanted products from theKompany that Ximian itself doesn't provide. It almost makes me want to stick it out with Gnome out of spite -- despite the fact that I'm undecided about commiting to it as a desktop in the future. Where will this condescending attitude go next? Gnumeric and GIMP? GTK+? C coders in general? Anyone who doesn't want KDE?
Attaboy, Gordon. You really presented yourself and theKompany well there.
--------
Bleah! Heh heh heh... BLEAH BLEAH!!! Ha ha ha ha...
They're an open source outfit because they produce and release open source code. Granted not all the code they produce is Open Source but I define an 'Open Source Outfit' as one which releases some portion of their products under a recognized OSS license. I don't believe being an 'Open Source Outfit' and making money off of binaries is mutually exclusive - in fact, the general description is, software where the source code is made available to the user (read:customer). Nothing is said about not selling the binary, just that the source code is made available as well.
--CTH
--
--Got Lists? | Top 95 Star Wars Line
It's nice to see an Open Source Outfit with a workable business plan (read: Not nebulous). I have not problem with the mixing of OSS and closed source. This seems fair and reasonable provided it is handled with a certain degree of integrity which the Kompany seems to be doing.
I have not had the oportunity to use any of the Kompany's products but I'll certainlty look to them now if I have need of a product in a space the sell in.
I expect we'll see a lot more hybrid companies like this in the furture. I'd actually be kind of halfway interested in Microsoft's (Mundy's) take on their successful use of both OSS and closed source in combination...
Their usage does seem to throw a lot of cold water on Mundie's arguments.
--CTH
--
--Got Lists? | Top 95 Star Wars Line
I was going to suggest Kryptonite as a name for your next app, but nevermind
[*] GNOME is planned to be used in Mono, but that does not make Mono part of the GNOME project.
Oh it isn't consuming resources over there at Ximian, keepers of the flame for Gnome...
From the mono contact page:
You can contact the Mono Team by sending e-mail to `mailto:mono-hackers@ximian.com'.
You can contact the general forum of discussion by sending e-mail to mono-list@ximian.com
You can contact me (Miguel de Icaza) by sending e-mail to miguel@ximian.com. My web page is http://primates.ximian.com/~miguel"
You can also reach Ximian.
Looks like it's going to consume some would-otherwise-be-working-on-Gnome resources to me.
I truely believe that KDE will slowly take over as the defacto desktop environment, interviews like these reaffirm my thoughts on the issue. We know where we stand with KDE what their goals are and how they plan on getting from A to B without getting sidetracked by C. They're proving themselves to have excellent vision and product execution. Congrats to The Kompany, I'm sure I'll be buying some of your products in the future.
Dont go there.
Because for every Kompany, there is a RedHat and a Caldera.
You are standing in an open field west of a white house, with a boarded front door.
This space for rent.
I had to check it myself to be sure, but Ximian really does sell a stuffed monkey. They hide it at the bottom of the merchandise page, because they are ashamed.
___
___
The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason. --Ben Franklin
Great to see some commercial apps koming to KDE! ;-)
I tested through the latest KDE and found it very obejectively better than any Windows ever.
And now it's even faster!
They achieved what M$ took a whole decade to implement in about one third of it!
Now what's so special about KDE? They succeeded in building a very clean looking Evironment for all sorts of users ranging from the "dumb" to real power users. Also great is that they finally reached compatibility with GNOME. I'm a real fan of the countless IOslaves also
I hope they can reach the corporate desktop with many fantastic apps (one main reason for the absence of linux on the corporate desktop may be the lack of commercial support for end user apps like time managers à la Outlook).
Konqueror should also be ported to Windows (that Windows users see how great unix apps can be) and MacOS (yea I miss it on the mac).
Keep on the great the work!
I read at least two references/comparisons with Ximian and how Ximian does not have a product which makes $.
Because Ximian is making a desktop and a Linux desktop is typically free, and its applications have been free, how should Ximian make $?
Isn't the open source/free inherently opposed to 'for sale' software?
I guess if Ximian was to sell its desktop and applications, I wonder what would be a reasonable amount.
"There ought to be limits to freedom"
The real question is whether, when the Kompany is rather larger, the guy will still ocassionally be answering the phones to keep in touch with his customers.
And just to clarify:
1: Free as in speech gives free as in beer. If you allow unrestricted distribution you will loose your revenue.
2: No, Redhat is not an example of a working software development business model. Redhat lives on selling other peoples work (nothing wrong with that, they have choosen to give it away), they are not developers (as their major business anyway). These people are developers and must make a revenue on the products they develop.
"The FSF doesn't advocate never making money. "
No, but that is the RESULT of their suggested business model.
"that this is short term greed? "
Not going bancrypsy is short term greed?
"Moral: they may not buy the options, but they won't buy the basic package if you don't have options. "
This is my experience also. I didn't say that you shouldn't sell support, you MUST sell support if people are going to buy your products (as you say, people need to know that help exists if needed). Atleast with enterprise software this is the case. However, if you spend a couple of millions on developing a piece of software you got to make this back from the people who uses it, as simple as that.
"You may have experience, but your user name and your attitude betray that it's in a different field than the one I am talking about."
What do you mean? I do work to make a living, thats right. I do have bills to pay. I have certainly never said anything else.
Are we talking about different things here? I was under the impression that you suggested that service&support is a working business model, as in possible to live on. I said it isn't. Did I misunderstand you?
How have work for a living have anything to do with that?
"If you contend otherwise, then all I can say is that your failure does not necessarily extend to others. The Free Software community is not putting all its eggs in your particular basket."
I didn't fail, where did you get that assumption from? I have made some money on service&support but the market is way to small. You can only sell service&support for a tiny fraction of software that is hard enough to use, therefore the need for support.
There is simple not anyone asking for service&support for most software. How do you suggest anyone should be able to sell something then where is noone who is interrested in buying it? That makes no sence.
This is just amazing, how hard can it possible be to grasp simple basic economic concepts?
Example:
Say I work at company C. We develop product P for X amount of money. Say we are a small company with 20 people developing, this will make the personell cost only about 2 million USD a year (salaries, taxes, vacasions, sickness, training etc).
Such a company needs to make about 3 million USD a year just to avoid bancrypsy in the long run.
Now, we sell support for this product P. The problem is that everybody else also can do this WITHOUT contributing to the development costs. This means they can lower the price way below our price because the only thing they have to cover is the salaries to those who sells the support. We must require enough money to pay salaries to both the support staff and the developers.
If you spend X money developing something you basically must get atleast X money by selling the very same thing.
This is the first problem. The second problem is that the market is too small. There certainly is a market for selling service&support but it's way to small.
To sell something you must have customers who wants to buy it.
The problem with FSF is that they are out of touch with reality when it comes to economics.
"Please read and understand, then post if necessary; those first two steps are the most important!"
Again, I have read everything the FSF has ever written, the problem is that they are simply wrong. They need to get out into the reality.
What he said about service&support.
"have probably made about $200 doing it, "
I have said this a long time without anyone listening. The service&support business model DOES NOT EXISTS.
What we need on Linux is more companies like this. Companies that will survive in the long run (even after they run out of venture capital) with a sound business model giving us great usable software.
I Bought KDE STUDIO GOLD and it is really great! Cies like that need are money and I am glad to help them since they provide great software. But we need to support the Distros to if we want to have good Linux Distros to Install this good soft. Free or not Free, I don't really care. What I like is using good software and being able to help out and submitting patches and all...if you pay at the end its just normal...money rules the world...but one day you get to the point where you have enough ( Hey Bill! ) It's a shame we can't ask Bill this question : Hey Bill , you have all the money in the world, so what are you trying to prove crushing every little competition?
Be Yourself, Be Amazed...