Slashdot Mirror


Businessweek Covers Linuxworld

MadFarmAnimalz writes "BusinessWeek has coverage of Linuxworld up, and it makes interesting reading in places. Amongst things touched upon are the open-source business model, how vendors will be tempted into locking in customers into their offerings, and other things." I'll be out there tomorrow for the Golden Penguin Bowl, as well as judging exhibitors. Busy day.

28 of 124 comments (clear)

  1. How about news networks? by MacGunner · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ABC, Fox News, NBC... etc. Its time for some REAL tech in everyday coverage.

    1. Re:How about news networks? by bogie · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well how many stories on Windows do you see in the news? Besides TechTV I can't remember the last time I saw something on Windows on mainstream news. The only time in the past several years MS has been mentioned is at major product launches and during the antitrust trial. So considering how sparsely windows is mentioned is it surprising that Linux doesn't get mentioned? In general mainstream news sources could care less about technology unless its biotech.

      --
      If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch
  2. Slashdotted already? by grub · · Score: 5, Funny


    LinuxWorld was a huge success!

    Bob Young gave out 23 free red velvet fedoras. He commented that he would have liked to have given out more but being that RedHat only made $300K last year "times were rough".

    Across the hall, 6 gentlemen from the RepoDepot were clearing out the Mandrakesoft booth.

    VA Software had a good showing, several dozen slashdot fans shared pizza with Cowboy Neal and CommanderTaco was demoing a beta version of his GPL spelling software.

    --
    Trolling is a art,
  3. CNET story, not Businessweek by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Hey, that's a CNET story re-run on Business Week. Duh

  4. Linuxworld 2003 news links by dietlein · · Score: 5, Informative
  5. Open Source Shmopen Source by Brett333 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I just don't see how you can have a profitable buissness solely on open source software. The only thing you can actually make money on is either documentation or support. But how are you supporting your development team?

    www.1001InsomniacNights.com

    1. Re:Open Source Shmopen Source by gpinzone · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That's somewhat true, however what's the other option? Come up with your own OS? Why? Who needs it? Besides, I don't think these companies are offering open source software. They're offering closed-source software on an open OS. Big difference.

      The reason Linux is seeing this recent resurgence is due to the natrual evolution of the operating system's relevance to the overall picture. If programming languages are at a high enough level such that porting applications (i.e., the real moneymakers) is easy between different OSes, then why not go with the one that costs zero? Mind you, I said "relevance" of the OS, not "importance." For example, deciding which CPU and chipset to use is important, but has no (little) relevance to OS and application selection.

    2. Re:Open Source Shmopen Source by podperson · · Score: 3, Interesting

      1) I don't see that there's any reason to base a business purely on open source. You can write proprietary software AND open source software (e.g. modifications to open software you interact with).

      2) Even if for some ideological reason you choose to write open source software only, you can do it on a fee for service basis (e.g. other people who need custom modifications but don't have the wherewithal).

    3. Re:Open Source Shmopen Source by dentar · · Score: 3, Informative

      I'll bite on this troll.

      You don't sell software.. You sell the development services and write custom coding to fit a business.

      --
      -- I am. Therefore, I think!
  6. Re:What's there to celebrate? by tewfik · · Score: 5, Insightful

    is that pessimistic or what? Those are sad headlines, but Linux future is being readied in the background. Indeed in todays world economy the fresh money linux companies need to survive is to come from the formerly-3rd-world countries. These recon there is no point in using expensive software and are switchig steadily to open source solutions. The same applies for the tech certs. We expect there will be far more people certified RHCE or LPI than MSCE and the like in the near future.
    One never knows where the salvation is to come from.

    --
    -- Or So Tewfik Wrote. --
  7. Standards? by mcoko · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I see an issue here that is similar to all of the problem people have with Windows.

    IMO, there are 3 distinct pieces to a computer. The Hardware, OS and Software. We all hate M$ because they Have crappy software that only runs on Windows and they force good companies to develop software for there OS, which alot of people don't like. That would be fine if there was an alternative OS to use with the same software.

    Similarly If you use Linux/Unix software you can only use it on Linux/Unix.

    What I see as the next revolution is some sort of Stanard Interface between OS and Software. This would allow for new companies to startup that create OS's by the handful allowing for more competetion, profit and cheaper prices which all fuel innovation.

    This is similar to Java, but Jave fixed this with a compiler solutions.

    Maybe some sort of OS/Software interface Object can be created to make the connection. That way you choose the best OS and the best software you want.

    --
    www.fotoforay.com
    1. Re:Standards? by zulux · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This sort of exists already:
      There are really neet libraries that abstract the OS to a vague blur. I forget somtimes that I'm using Emacs/Cygwin a Widnows XP-based laptop to code for a Unix/Mac/Windows client that communicaes to a SQL server that could be on any OS.

      Increasingly, the OS is becoming irelivent.

      MS knows this and wants to push their own abstratios laywer, with a new set of lockin : .NET and all of the .NET Microsoft Libraries.

      Beware.

      --

      Moneyed corporations, non-working 'poor' and criminal prisoners are turning productive citizens into tax-slaves.

  8. Golden Penguin Bowl? by burgburgburg · · Score: 4, Funny
    I got 5 large riding on that. I gave Red Hat with 8 points.

    I hear they got Angelina Jolie (dressed as her character from Hackers) to sing the National Anthem, and MIT Marching Band for the half-time show.

  9. Re:er, why is this "interesting"? by b0r1s · · Score: 2, Informative

    silly, Linux isn't a company, you must be jesting.

    Linux isn't a company. LNUX is.

    LNUX was the symbol for VA Linux, who has since changed their name to VA Software (aka: slashdot's parent company).

    LNUX IPOd during the boom, and was well above $200/share for some time, and is now trading for barely over $1/share. For more details, check out your favorite financial site.

    --
    Mooniacs for iOS and Android
  10. it's called the killer app ... by HealYourChurchWebSit · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Amongst things touched upon are the open-source business model, how vendors will be tempted into locking in customers into their offerings, and other things.

    Not until there is agreement and cooperation between the gnome & KDE contest -- and not until Star/OpenOffice begins a concerted campaign to replace MS Office (e.g. marketing, money, superbowl advertising) -- not until those things happen will Linux win fealty.

    --
    --- have you healed your church website?
  11. Open-source ethics by Neophytus · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Amongst things touched upon are the open-source business model, how vendors will be tempted into locking in customers into their offerings, and other things
    Part of the good nature of the open source community is the sense of freeness and sharing. Locking people into certain 'offerings' and related things is completely against these values. All the hassle of open source without the benefits of the community that surrounds you - rather pointless if you ask me.

  12. "How do you make money....." by mao+che+minh · · Score: 4, Interesting
    The same way proprietary companies do: sell the software, and make it worth your customer's while to purchase future upgrades and/or support. An open source license doesn't render software free of cost.

    IBM doesn't seem to be having a problem with their open source solutions.

    1. Re:"How do you make money....." by rgmoore · · Score: 4, Informative
      Besides making products that support Linux on a whole, how are they supporting the market share of the linux community?

      One thing that they're doing is helping developers to improve the Linux kernel to improve its performance for tasks that their customers consider important. They've contributed their journaling file system, and they're currently working on improvements to Linux scalability to make it possible to run Linux efficiently on SMP and NUMA systems with very large numbers of processors. They're also working on the applications software side; ISTR that they've been a contributor to Apache development.

      And, of course, that's just IBM. Other major hardware vendors have contributed to other Free Software projects that they see as strategically useful. Sun, for instance, is a major supporter of GNOME because they see it as a viable replacement for their crusty and outdated CDE desktop. Intel has contributed to GCC and (IIRC) the Linux kernel, specifically to help give them better support for the IA64 architecture. NeXT and now Apple have contributed to GCC; Objective C was built on top of GCC back when it was just the Gnu C Compiler. Those are just some examples, mind you. I'm sure that there are plenty of other hardware makers who have contributed to Free Software because it makes plenty of business sense for them to do so.

      --

      There's no point in questioning authority if you aren't going to listen to the answers.

  13. Re:What's there to celebrate? by JordoCrouse · · Score: 4, Insightful

    OS X already won. Any geek or scientist worth their salt who wants a UNIX home computer already has an iBook or a G4.

    Won what? Was there a race?

    It is my contention that nobody cares about Linux on the desktop any more outside of a small group of Linux afficiandos (such as me).

    And I gotta say, that I'm ok with that. There are many more interesting places to do operating systems battle, so as far as I am concerned, OS X can try to win the pissing match over the ruins of the desktop market while the rest of us start concentrating on the next generation of computing.

    Have a great time.

    --
    Do you have Linux and a DotPal? Click here now!
  14. Are the analysts really the experts? by kingLatency · · Score: 4, Insightful

    These guys have to figure out how they're going to generate some money

    What Red Hat and SuSE have to do is create an annuity revenue stream

    These seem like the kind of things these companies either already know to do or already know how to do. It seems like these analysts aren't really providing any new insight. Obviously Red Hat and SuSE have to make money... After being in business for years, surely these guys know a thing or two about how to stay afloat.

    --
    "I've got to stop masturbating! It makes me too lazy! Stop it, Albert. Stop it." -- Albert Einstein
  15. Development Costs vs. Profits by sterno · · Score: 4, Insightful

    From the article:

    These guys have to figure out how they're going to generate some money," said Aberdeen analyst Bill Claybrook. "If Red Hat Advanced Server is part of a deal with Oracle (9i database software) on a cluster of four Dell machines, each of which has four CPUs, Oracle gets $60,000 a CPU, or $960,000, Dell gets $150,000 or so for the hardware, and Red Hat will get $10,000.

    The dollar figures are totally meaningless here without a context for what the costs were going in. How much does it cost Dell in time, resources, personnel, etc, to build that server? How much did it cost Oracl in developer hours to get their product out the door?

    The thing is that, revenue numbers can be a hell of a lot lower for an open source driven business and still be profitable because their outlays are substantially less. Sure RedHat pays for some development work on Linux, but it's not nearly the amount they'd have to pay in if they were a proprietary software vendor.

    RedHat probably has lower margins than Oracle, but does it really matter? As long as they make profit sufficient enough to maintain the business over the long term, it's irrelevant. Sure, RedHat may never be as big as Oracle or Dell, but maybe that's a positive sign of change in the industry. Less people working at software companies, and more people doing real work with the software that is now cheaper and higher quality.

    --
    This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
  16. Open Source Business Model by DeadSea · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I have quite a few bugs in Mozilla that I have reported, or for which I have voted, so I get quite a bit of email from Bugzilla. I have seen an increasing number of posts of people who attach a comment to a bug saying "this is really important to me, it needs to be implemented ASAP". The usual response is "Please stop spamming us. We have limited resources and will get to bugs in time (possibly a long time). If you really want this bug fixed, fix it yourself, or pay somebody to fix it for you."

    The problem with this is that there are not many people who (even if they are programmers) are up to speed with the Mozilla code and can fix bugs. This mostly rules out do it yourself. That also means that it is probably rather expensive to hire one of these people for the time it takes to fix some bug. I'm thinking $200 to $5000 depending on the amount of work it would take (especially for some of the more far reaching feature requests.)

    How hard would it be to add a distributed "pay for development of feature" option to open source projects? The idea is that if 1000 people want a bug fixed and each can pledge $1 to the person that fixes it (and contributes the open source to the project), you might be able to get a lot of bugs fixed and have some revenue stream for developers.

    The first hurdle is setting up the pledge system. I don't if Paypal or another mircopayment system could be rigged for "pledge mode".

    After the pledge system is in place, you would have to decide who can say if a bug is "fixed". It can't be the person that gets the money. It could possibly be a vote of the people paying, or it could be some designated third party.

    People contributing money would probably also want a time limit on their pledges. "I'll pledge $10 if this gets fixed in the next three months", but not "I'll give $10 whenever this gets fixed".

    Does anybody here have any insight as to how this could be implemented?

    1. Re:Open Source Business Model by extra88 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      First, I think it would have to be initiated by someone offering to fix a bug. Bugzilla already shows bug popularity, right? So a programmer makes a post somethingn like, "I'll fix this bug when this tip jar < link > reaches X dollars."

      I don't think a pledge would cut it. You would either have to have the dollars held in escrow until the work was completed or just pay the dollars up front. The latter option would be dependent upon the reputation of the person offering the service. I think that's how other "software ransoming" schemes have worked. Escrow would be tricky because who's to say when the work it done to everyone's satifaction?

      Actually, it could be really interesting if voting for bugs could include monetary value. Programmers could be like bounty hunters, looking for the bugs which have racked up the most loot. They pick a bug, fix it, then collect the loot. For such a thing to work, I think the Mozilla people would have to collect real money from the bug voters beforehand, perhaps a small account (~US$20) from which bug voters could pledge dollars. The Mozilla people could distribute the funds when they think the bug is fixed. Maybe Mozilla could make a little money, like a small initial setup fee then a percentage of each bounty payment. I don't know much about how the Mozilla project is run so I don't know how off-base this is.

    2. Re:Open Source Business Model by Anonymous+DWord · · Score: 2, Funny

      Know of any escrow services that would be willing and able to work with many small payments for one item?

      Write one. I'll throw in a buck to, uhh, wait...

      --
      "If he thinks he can hide and run from the United States and our allies, he's sorely mistaken." Bush on bin Laden
    3. Re:Open Source Business Model by Cyberop5 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Although your idea is novel, I believe this solution will only hurt the quality of Open Source Software and Free Software and thus the movement. It already has a reputation of being buggy and difficult to use

      A few rotten developers might get the idea to purposely plant bugs so they can "fix" them later and profit. Or they may make code extremely difficult to read and overly complex so that only they can work on the project. This may work with corporations such that Transmeta goes to Red Hat and says "Here's 20,000 USD, make a kernel that supports 15 of our new processors" (And corporations like Intel already do that, as pointed out by one thread).
      When this ideology gets down to SourceForge and home brewed projects, someone may say "here's 20 bucks, make sure your word processor can cut and paste."
      That is when we get hurt.

      Development trees may include less features with hopes that some wealthy individual will finance the growth of features.

      Donate to your favorite project as a whole, not to the individual developers. Those funds pay for servers and other stuff too.

      --
      Urgo: "I want to live. I want to experience the universe and I want to eat pie!"
      Jack: "Who doesn't??"
  17. 10 Fun Facts! About Linux World by sam_handelman · · Score: 2, Funny

    1) Linus Torvalds is one hunky piece of gourmet man-candy.
    2) Richard M Stallman cannot say "GNU/Linux World" three times fast.
    3) This year will feature the first shooting spree in Linux World history.
    4) As a result, next year's Linux World will be devoted to the memory of Bill Claybrook of the Aberdeen Group, gunned down while interposing his body between the shooter and the visiting school children from Greater Houlton Christian Academy.
    5) This will cause all Linux users to be branded as terrorists, even though the shooter is a disgruntled BSD user, because the authorities don't even know the difference.
    6) When MS memos surface planning a publicity stunt / shooting spree at one of their own trade shows, no one will even care.
    7) MS has secretly rented a theatre to showcase their line of Linux apps, including a Windows/GUI that runs on top of the Linux kernel.
    8) No such products exist. Those entering the theatre will be brainwashed.
    9) The Society of Women Engineers is sponsoring a special recruitment event for high school aged future women engineers in my hotel room; any woman aged 15-19 with an interest in pursuing a four year degree in engineering or the applied sciences is welcome to attend. Dress should be informal and not too complicated as I intend to be blasted.
    10) Despite the best efforts of the conference organizers, funding was unavailable to spike the drinking water in the hotel with acid. Your generous donations could help make next year's Linux World that much more surreal.
    11) Spinal Tap will play a free concert in front of the Expo on the last day. Yes, the volume will be turned all the way up to 11.

    --
    The good and new comes from no quarter where it is looked for, and is always something different from what is expected.
  18. The perfect recycling machine for trolls. by MyNameIsFred · · Score: 2, Funny

    The best part of Apple/BSD/Linux is dead headlines is that you can recycle. Pick a headline, and insert Apple, BSD, or Linux as appropriate. The best source of headlines is the Apple archives. They've been dying since 1984, longer than anybody.

  19. Now better than proprietry? by Michael+Woodhams · · Score: 4, Insightful

    From the article:

    "HP ... will announce customers including ASP Futuro Bolivia, which uses Linux and Oracle 9i RAC using four, four-processor HP servers to manage the pensions of about half the retirees in Bolivia."

    An interesting point here is that once you've paid for an Oracle 4 proc license, the cost of adding a proprietry Unix likely won't even change your second-most-significant digit in the price. This means these people believe Linux is better than proprietry, independent of the free/gratis factor.

    --
    Quattuor res in hoc mundo sanctae sunt: libri, liberi, libertas et liberalitas.