Snort Creator Makes Good

Anonymous Coward writes: "Robin Miller, aka Roblimo, has written a great analysis of one of the first Open Source companies to be profitable before their IPO, Sourcefire! In this 'local boy makes good', we read about Team Fortress-playing programmer Marty Roesch, who writes Snort to beat his online gaming addiction. Now Snort is one of the most successful Intrusion Detection Systems out there and Marty's start-up is going gangbusters. Robin explains how Marty's company started in his basement (like Apple's garage), got profitable, then got venture capital in a time when everyone swears there is no venture. Marty even offers jobs at Sourcefire for the Slashdot crowd, 'Linux zealots, Open Source gurus, self-starters who are self motivating so I can just turn them loose...'"

Comments

Step two revealed

[gmhowell]

First go read the newsforge article.... Okay, the joke is:

Step one: develop open source software
Step two: mumble, mumble
Step three: profit!

Now, it seems that step two is revealed. It's actually a few steps. Now, for the first time ever:

Step two (a): Come up with (proprietary) tools that make the basic (GPL) Snort code easy to understand and use for non-technical managers.
Step two (b): Load Snort and the additional tools into a box, and sell the box as a complete solution, instead of just selling software.

It's been said before that there is no incentive to make OSS easy to use. Here (and elsewhere) is the proof. Make it hard to use. Release it. BUT, make the config tools easy to use, IF you pay for them.

I'm not slagging the guy, he's gotta eat. But it is another notch in the belt for those who are cynical about OSS and business.

Re:Step two revealed

[natefaerber]

But the great thing is that anyone can build a config tool and sell it, thus creating competition. They can do that because they can see the source.

Or, someone could add features to the source that could make it easier with or without tools.

It's about CHOICE and OPTIONS.

"...there is no incentive to make OSS easy to use."
What's the incentive to make OSS?

Re:Step two revealed

[crimoid]

Exactly, but this is a GOOD thing.

Developers get to eat (and maybe pay rent), and customers aren't tied to one vendor.

In addition the developer can get the assistance from the community at large, while the customer has equal opportunity to review the code that they are using.

This is a shining example of how to leverage Open Source and make a living at it. Find a middle-ground where the core code is usable but not so easy that a monkey in a suit can install it.... the techies can run it for free and the suits can pay for it. I don't see how this is a bad thing.

Re:Step two revealed

[carlos_benj]

I'm not slagging the guy

Sure you are. If you read that far down into the article you had to read about the technical guys who gladly would have installed snort but couldn't get it past the suits because it didn't come from a 'company'. In other words, he could have sold the product as-is. The problem was that so could anyone else. The GUI front end for the phb's, a preloaded box, all that is just differentiation (what makes us better than the other guys).

Re:Step two revealed

[gmhowell]

Honestly, I did miss the part (or underplayed) where he said the tools the company developed helped corporate buy-in.

I think the thing that helped more than the product was the price tag. If you sell it for $49.95, it's not worth that much to a Fortune 100. But $20,000 per box plus $10k per sensor... That must really be worth something if you are charging that much for it.