Slashdot Mirror
IBM Turns to Open Source Development
mmmbop writes "'Is open source changing the way that software is made? It is at IBM. BetaNews sat down with Doug Heintzman, IBM Software Group's VP of Strategy and Technology, to discuss the adoption of a hybrid development model called Community Source that combines the best elements of the open source model with decades of IBM programming practice - avoiding a top down approach that IBM says could make Microsoft's Longhorn obsolete upon arrival.' A long read, but well worth it."
Never trust someone who says that Lotus Notes is "highly functional."
Traditionally IBM's methodologies have been very close to (and predate) that of open source, which derived much of its culture and programming mindset from that of IBM or Bell Labs. Their documentation as compared to other hardware/software developers has always encouraged the user to learn about and extend the environment in which they work rather than supporting only a superficial "click here, then there" mentality.
IBM has always been good for open source. It makes sense that open source can be good for IBM as well.
Try not. Do or do not, there is no try.
-- Dr. Spock, stardate 2822-3.
'Community source' sounds like another excuse to act like you are releasing free software, then hold back on how you can modify or redistribute it. Didn't Microsoft pull the same FUD with their 'shared source' thing?
I couldn't bear to read the whole thing. Example: ...Certainly a lot of our componentization efforts, and subsequently the tooling to support those componentization efforts, are focused on the core enabling.
I stopped reading after that. Too much consultant speak even if the content is good. And I've been a consultant for years...
I thought it was Microsoft's job to ensure obsolescence upon delivery.
If brevity is the soul of wit, then how does one explain Twitter?
Basically IBM has a big project that needs to be done.
They break it down into components, and delegate these components into their labs around the world.
Now here is the smart part- Instead of hiring REAL (as in doing it for a living) programmers in their centres to do program, they get OS community to do them instead.
After a year, IBM collects all the parts together, assemble them, trim and fit them until they work right.
PROFIT!!!
Not much cost- they are genius.
They could show their true dedication to open source by releasing the code behind OS/2 and AiX. While it will of course take time, effort and money on the part of both developers and lawyers, it would be an excellent show of good-faith towards the open source community. After all, if Sun can do it with Solaris, then IBM can surely do it with AiX and OS/2.
Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
There is considerable merit in open source when you've got many eyeballs you can drive out bugs and security holes and flaws and fix them more efficiently.
This is an argument commonly used in favour of open source products. It's positive to hear them coming from major commercial companies too now. Open Source has gotten a more "legit" status now that it is clearly demonstrated by IBM and Apple that commercial products can be made or based on OS. Not too long ago, a manager-type friend started inquiring about "open source"... it's generating some buzz these days.
see a Text Widget
"Yeah, commercial companies have to go full-on to prove they're OSS friendly...none of this half-ass crap!"
I hope you're aware that AiX and OS/2 are a very small portion of IBM's entire software product line. Indeed, they would be the most wise products to open source. They would offer users the ability to test and gain experience using such systems. If they experiences are good, then perhaps such people would further recommend the use of such systems in enterprise settings. This in turn may garner support for IBM's other products. And such products may require support, especially in enterprise settings. Considering that IBM is a service-oriented company, that will bode well for them.
And then there is the reputation gain. That alone may very well exceed the costs to initially release the source to said products.
So please, save your rhetoric and blatant misrepresentations for elsewhere. Please try to think of the big picture before you post again. Thanks.
Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
Aside from the interviewer not knowing what "managed code" is, I think that sums up a lot of IBM's difficulty. Everyone else does something simple, IBM does something complicated. Later in the article, Heintzman compares the Windows codebase with Lotus Notes. From the leaked source code, though, we know that the Windows codebase is very clean for its size. Complex and messy code affects every large piece of software, but Microsoft seems to have managed at least moderately well, perhaps unlike IBM.
Whoever corrects a mocker invites insult;
whoever rebukes a wicked man incurs abuse.
--Proverbs 9:7
When I read what he is saying they want to do, it sure sounds a lot like reading Fred Brooke's "Mythical Man Month". They are realizing that writting high quality, re-usable components with good documentation is very expensive. I believe "MMM", discussed this in the very first chapter. There are two orthognal qualities (I believe re-usable, and quality documentation, but it's a really long time since I read the book) that add a factor of 3 in each direction. If you wanted both it would take 9 times as long.
Stratigically, it makes sense to invest in creating those, if you have features that will be needed in enough different projects and areas. It sounds like they are planning on breaking down internal barriers, and providing highly re-usable, and well documented internally, and then ensuring that people know of it's existance.
Providing the source is a good idea. Ensuring that the fixes get moved upstream is a good idea. However, this sounds like good Engineering Practices (which I suppose is what a lot of "Open Source" advocates say you get, where as "Free Software" advocates, say it's purely an ethical issue).
It sure seems like this has little to do with "Open Source", and a lot to do with solid Engineering. It just so happens that Open Source has a lot of solid engineering behind it. It sure looks like a no brainer to re-use source you already have access to. If you are going to re-use it, it should probably be designed for that. If people who didn't write it are going to use it, it should probably be documented fairly well. Some how this seems fairly obvious, as opposed to, "we add features as we need them, to resolve some personal niche", which is the crux of "Open Source" according to CatB.
Kirby
Aix has by far the most solid and guaranteed-to-work patching system among any OS in the market today. Among other aspects like san, device drivers, reliability... I am making my judgement after hitting deep with almost every flavor of commercial unix with the exception of SCO.
I am still highly confused as to why IBM is pushing linux so much harder than Aix. I would however favor the merging of Aix and Linux into a single OS supported by IBM. What they are doing now makes no sense.
OS/2 and AIX might only be a small portion of IBM's product line, but they're 100% of IBM's OS product line.
reputation gain...amoung people who are Free Software Advocates?
Don't get me wrong, I'm a very dedicated advocate myself...but I don't ask commercial companies to do things for me. I ask myself to.
"Big picture" be damned - IBM isn't the government, and in our capitalistic society, they can't be concerned with the Greater Good as their primary drive. That they contribute to the Greater Good at all is good enough for me (well, if we have to remain capitalistic...personally, I prefer communism, which at least makes me consistent when I advocate OSS).
3. mvs/zos/s390 -- and related software
???
For the love of god, WHY?
It's 50% assembly and 50% PLI. What the hell are you going to do with it? It's not like you can port it to anything, and for customization theres user exit hooks in the code at every interesting point anyway.
The only possible reasons I can think of are:
a) education purposes: at least 80% of the code is recovery routines. Learn how to do it right...
b) to resell it
You think emacs is evil?! You've never used VM's XEDIT have you?!! That's evil, baby!
Indeed, I share the same feelings. That's not to suggest that Linux is an incapable system or anything of that sort; of course it is not. But AiX has a maturity and inherent reliability that is second to none.
Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
"OS/2 and AIX might only be a small portion of IBM's product line, but they're 100% of IBM's OS product line."
I hesitate to reply to such an obvious troll. Anyways, I suppose AiX and OS/2 are 100% of IBM's operating systems when you intentionally go out of your way to ignore IBM's other operating systems such as z/OS, PC-DOS, K42, OS/390, z/VM, DOS/VSE, SVS, MVT, and so on.
Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
And there was lots of it: the documentation for OpenVMS was at least 10 or 15 feet in the bookshelf. Absolutely great.
It is mentioned in the article that IBM hopes that they will be able to make a contribution back by introducing some of their techniques and practices into the Open Source world. If there is one area where I really hope they succeed, it is if they were to inspire people to spend more time on documentation.
After all, what good is a program that does exactly what you want, if you can't find out that it exists and how it works by surfing the net? If I have to download and unpack something just to see if there happens to be some more or less cryptic files that I can read to see if it was worth downloading and unpacking, the chances are very slim that I'm gonna bother. And I think many people are like me in this respect.
Christian Engström, Former Member of the European Parliament 2009-2014 for The Pirate Party, Sweden
uhmm, I think it's called sarcasm ;)
Sig? What's this sig thing I hear people talking about?
No, that was not sarcasm. It's cock trollery at its worst. Intentionally misrepresenting, if not outright lying, about IBM's product lines is not sarcasm in any way. Zealotism: yes. Trolling: yes. Cock trollery: yes. Fundamentalism: yes. Sarcasm: no.
Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
Now here is the smart part- Instead of hiring REAL (as in doing it for a living) programmers in their centres to do program, they get OS community to do them instead.
No. IBM is not releasing its code for programmers around the world to hack on. All of the programmers working on this code are employees of IBM software development labs. The purpose is to avoid reinvention and to allows programmers in different projects to improve upon one anothers' ideas.
AFAICT there are no plans to make this codebase available to the rest of IBM outside of Software Group, much less to the whole world. I wish they'd provide access to developers in IBM Global Services. Maybe that will happen eventually, but it doesn't seem to be part of the current plan.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
IBM does like open source in a number of places, but they don't seem to be shy about contributing themselves or hiring people who are already working on stuff they want. IBM may see open source as a way to share costs of development, but I suspect that it is more marketing position and increasing efficiency by avoiding internal politics that drives IBM to open source. IBM tries to be a good community player, and seems to be succeeding in most cases.
Whoever corrects a mocker invites insult;
whoever rebukes a wicked man incurs abuse.
--Proverbs 9:7
If you can't read sarcasm in this
I can't stand companies that only give a few hundred thousand in donations to charities, instead of giving 100% of their net profits. Those bastards
it's completely lost on you I fear.
Sig? What's this sig thing I hear people talking about?
Sometimes it's difficult to tell the intentional misrepresentation of facts from sarcasm. In this case I am quite sure that that user was being completely serious, and therefore partaking in cock trollery. Please see his post where he claims that AiX and OS/2 are the only products in IBM's operating system line.
Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
Lets see IBM release bits of WebSphere, DB2, MQSeries or Notes to Open Source. IBM likes open source as much as it is detrimental to their competitors, but you'll be unlikely to see them open source their big moneymakers.
btw, what was I misrepresenting (since it was "blatant" and all, should be easy to point out)?
AFS is indeed whispered to be a primary open-source candidate for next year.
Without any details, this sounds much more like Microsoft's "Shared Source" than like being something clearly identified as F/OSS.
I miss so important topics like the used license(s) or which software packages are available.
If I take in mind, that Sun released OpenSolaris today, this interview sounds to IBM want's to draw attention away from that.
Except Longhorn is a Software Operating System.
Mac is a phyical computing applicance.
Its not fair to expect a parts manufacuter to be able to keep up with full widget makers, in any industry.
"Call us when the New age is old enough to drink" Beck
The only people who will always have cutting edge software are those who are willing to view their software as a utility (pay monthly for it). If software isn't updated on a continual basis it is always obsolete.
IBM's clients are big businesses (as far as their cash cow consulting services go). All of these businesses pay IBM tens and hundreds of thousands of dollars every month. The average Longhorn user isn't prepared to do that.
So, IBM claiming that Longhorn will be obsolete as soon as it is released is only pointing out the fact that Longhorn caters to a different market than IBM's products do. Mac's next OS will be obsolete as soon as it is put out as well as about 99.999% of all other software.
Just putting it in perspective. It's not an open source thing, it's just the way the software market works.
What software product does IBM make that is a market leader? Most of their software isn't even ranked #2.
So it makes sense for IBM try other approaches to improve their market position. It would be a mistake for the market leaders to drop their more effective processes and adopt IBM's revised techniques until IBM can prove their value in the market.
4758 Secure Coprocessor Driver for Linux
This project is a Linux device driver for the IBM 4758 PCI Cryptographic Coprocessor, which is a tamper-sensing and responding, programmable PCI card. It provides a highly secure subsystem in which data processing and cryptography can be performed.
ATM on Linux
ATM support for Linux is currently in pre-alpha stage. There is an experimental release, which supports raw ATM connections (PVCs and SVCs), IP over ATM, LAN emulation, MPOA, Arequipa, and some other goodies.
Abstract Machine Test Utility (AMTU) for Linux
Abstract Machine Test Utility (AMTU) is an administrative utility that checks whether the underlying protection mechanism of the hardware is being enforced. This is a requirement of the Controlled Access Protection Profile (CAPP) FTP_AMT.1.
Ananas Project: Summary
This is the source for Working XML, a column on developerWorks with companion project code that demonstrates the evolution of full-fledged XML applications. This is distributed under the artistic license.
Apache HTTP Server
The Apache project develops and maintains an open-source HTTP server for various modern desktop and server operating systems.
BlueHoc simulator
BlueHoc is a tool that predicts the performance of Bluetooth wireless hardware technologies. BlueHoc simulates the baseband and link layers of the Bluetooth specification.
COIN (Common Optimization INterface)
Developers can use Common Optimization INterface (COIN) to build optimization solutions. IBM mathematical optimization researchers opened the code they use in finding the optimal allocation of limited resources. The code has many applications in a variety of industries.
Channel Bonding
The Channel Bonding project works on methods to join multiple networks on Linux into a single logical network with higher bandwidth. The project team works with the Beowulf Ethernet Channel Bonding project, where bonding work began.
Consensus prototype
Consensus is a joint European project carried out by six companies. The project is partially funded by the European Commission. The project goal is to provide technology to support single-authoring for mobile devices. developerWorks hosts the open source implementation developed by the Consortium. Detailed information about the project is at the Consensus Project home page (http://www.consensus-online.org./
Content Query System (CQS) Project: Summary
Content Query System (CQS). CQS is a distributed peer-to-peer query system for the purpose of discovering content or data. XML messages are passed between systems and query "engines" are used to access the data that is being made available on the system.
Crypto Accelerator Driver
Device Driver Support for the IBM eServer Cryptographic Accelerator.
Crypto Interface Library
Generalized Interface library for the IBM eServer Cryptographic Accelerator Device Driver. Note, this is a low level api for the Specified adapter, it is not intended to be an interface which is written to by applications. Applications should use the openCryptoki PKCS#11 api for interfacing to the token.
Dynamic Probe Class Library (DPCL)
DPCL is an object-based C++ class library that allows tool developers and sophisticated tool users to build parallel and serial tools using a technology called dynamic instrumentation.
Embedded IBM PowerPC 4xx Linux Support
This project contains packages which enable add
I dunno why, but IBM has ALWAYS been a company that I didn't see as a monopoly, or threat to culture, like m$.
Remember they wouldn't crack or cowtale to gates on OS/2 (thank God!). Even though everyone suffered because of m$ since, I respect Big Blue for 'doing-the-right-thing' in not being part of the crimes of m$.
IBM along with Apple and the Lotus Corporation (remember 123?! :) actaully preddy much single handley got the word out about how wonderful computers would be in everyones hands.
It is therefore safe to say that we could have done without m$ crap, and infact the world would have excelled (scuse the pun) without it, instead of still waiting for LOOOOOOOOONNNNG Horned.
Ahhh, the good'ol days of Charlie Chaplin (remember the commercials from IBM?!) http://wso.williams.edu/~dgerstei/chaplin/myscans/ ibmcharlie.gif (sorry, it was all I could find quickly :( ..the wonderful MacinTosh Desktop, and what is considered the main reason people started buying pc's in droves initially..*Lotus 123* SpreadSheet/Calc program!!
I remember the true stories of peopel not even knowing that they actully needed a pc to run the program, they just went into the old ComputerLand stores and demanded a spanking-brand-new: *Lotus 123*!
I remember living in Boca Raton FL during that glorious error.. and walking through one of IBM's factories there.. they were (and i'm not exagurating) nearly a mile long.. filled to the hilt with ROBOTS that were building the PC's!! It waz amazing..
Soooo, Ibm has had to re-invent itself many times before...and that is ok, cuz that is what people (corps) do in order to stay in business.
And now.. the OSS Communities get to not only benefit from this **Classy Company**... but get to contribute and be a part of it.. in defeating the evil dragoon.. :)
I will gladly loose all of life's battles.. in order to win the war..
Thanks for making me look it up though.
Err, if they open sourced their big moneymakers, wouldn't they go out of business and then be unable to help us at all because their consultancy business was hurt by the loss of direct revenues from the licensing fees?
No, I doubt their motives are "pure" in the sense that they're not trying to get ahead of the competition. But so long as our interests are aligned, the fact that they have financial incentive (even in terms of hurting their rivals) is precisely *why* we can trust them to help us--because IBM will do what's good for IBM. And if that's good for us, too, it's best to be quiet, take advantage of that while we can, and make sure there are contingency plans in place in case that ever stops being true.
So I don't understand the complaint. No, it's not done out of purely altruistic motives, I suppose, but just why shouldn't we make the most of it while we can? Now if you see evidence that IBM's interests are beginning to diverge to a point where they'll start acting against OSS, by all means, gripe. Until then, doing so seems counter-productive, at best.
and it only makes me uneasy to see that the /. crowd didn't give this much of a thought, given the number of replies. Just because IBM is profiting with Linux, doesn't mean they are any way better than M$...
I don't feel like it...
IBM has already proven that corporate financial amd intellectual muscle is for naught if the premise ultimately being worked is bad, so Linux and other OSS boosters should not think IBM's support is any kind of vindication. They should be very afraid.
Why don't the OSS throngs comprehend that the same baseline common end-user base that has been known to disconnect LAN cables by RIPPING them out of the socket, shoving coffee cups into CD trays, call their company help desk to install codecs to watch porn on their company PCs, disables their AV software to speed up their machines, and so forth are not destined to adopt Linux? OS/2 Warp 4 was forty million times easier to work with and it still sucked like a 5,000 horsepower Electrolux. And it was IBM's.
As a Linux user, I'd be happier if those Inadvertant Grim Reapers at IBM stayed as far away as possible. What's next? What other loser to Redmond shall the OSS movement hang their hopes on?
If my grammar and spelling are off, I am [distracted/tired/careless] (take your pick)
Sorry, but just because you aren't using the latest and greatest doesn't mean that it is obsolete. My father still uses MS Office 97 for example, and it has all the features he needs. He decided to not use later versions of MS Office even when they were available for free, because the old one does its job. Software or any tool only becomes obsolete when the later version does the job better. In the case of Word, thats not happened since 97, given the features that my father needs.
Unless of course Microsoft will dominate the market with help from the whole Trusted Computing Hardware Vendor Lock-in Tool and people's "it works well enough" and "I don't give a shit" attitude...
Microsoft can't possibly be counting on this, it would never work.
Ho! Haha! Guard! Turn! Parry! Dodge! Spin! Ha! Thrust!
they HAVE been very succsesful with Eclipse.
perhaps my random speculation in openSolaris article is true. This, i believe, is another sign pointing towards the apperance of openO/S2 (or perhaps commO/S2).
They should also open Visual Test since they will no longer allow you to buy a license for it.
Core Enabling!
Core Enabling!
That's absolutely beautiful! The only problem is I can't decide whether it ought to be the name of a marketing buzzword from a 10-year-old video game console, or the name of a band.
AND NOW LADIES AND GENTLEMEN THE MOMENT YOU'VE BEEN WAITING FOR...
CORE ENABLING.
[epic guitar solo]
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
and then please read the follow-up post I make to being "called" on it.
> Err, if they open sourced their big moneymakers, wouldn't they go out of business
Not necessarily. They are already mostly a support company and the IBM name plus the fact that they developed the software will win them a majority of the contracts, even if they make the software itself free.
I suspect we will se IBM make more and more of their software free. Just not everything at once.
what about Eclipse? btw: Eclipse a kind of universal tool platform - an open extensible IDE for anything and nothing in particular. although i realize eclipse is not soleyan IBM producy, neither is Mozilla
whoops, now i see that u mentioned it in 1st paragraph. i feel stupid. sorry.
This Heintzman character sounds like he just climbed out of a Dilbert cartoon. ....Really, I always thought it was all a joke; I truly thought that NO-ONE would actually USE such moronic gabble-speak. Gad; this is depressing....
Regards;
Please this correction: "Except Longhorn is a mythical Software Operating System.
Longhorn (also known as Windows 2015 XP .NET Plus Deluxe) is just a scary story parents tell to their children to make them behave; it doesn't really exist. "If you don't go to bed right now, Longhorn will eat all your RAM and make you lag!"
Now that being said, there is a second part of this, and this is really borrowing from the culture of the open source community. There is a very important role in a software company like IBM for top down managed code architecture and all that kind of good stuff. But there's also a tremendous amount of potential innovation that is locked up in the heads of the front line programmers and we try to liberate that creativity and the innovative potential of all of those people. "
Well Mr. Heintzmann gets some homework from me. He first should write a "Hello World!" program in C, C++ or Perl, etc. After successfully completing that task, he should read his article again, and think if he is still the God of OpenSource development.
Robert