Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Former MS Employees Explore OSS

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the different-gig dept.

Roberto Andressi writes "A few former Microsoft employees have launched a Web site that evaluates open-source projects. The site is intended as a way for first-time OSS users to 'get their feet wet' before diving into the large community of open source projects out there. The site, Ohloh, will provide background information on a prospective project. The folks behind the site even plan to include a lexicon of terms for very new users. " From the article: "'We collect from the infrastructure the open-source community uses to develop the software,' Ohloh co-founder and CEO Scott Collison told CNET News.com. 'It also serves as an open-source directory. You can find open-source projects and compare them, and gradually find one that's right for you.' The site could appeal to developers who are frustrated by the number of open-source projects that lack clear explanations. Ohloh also seeks to help developers make a build vs. buy decision by offering code analysis, said Collison, who along with co-founder Jason Allen, previously worked at Microsoft."

25 of 107 comments (clear)

  1. Bill got em... by XenoPhage · · Score: 4, Funny

    Thanks slashdot.. Here I try to visit the site and see what it's all about, but it's obvious that Microsoft saw this news before me and has already squashed the site.. What a way to start a Monday...

    --
    XenoPhage
    Technological Musings
    1. Re:Bill got em... by pedalman · · Score: 3, Funny

      Either that, or these are the former MS troops who tried running Hotmail on NT.

      --
      Friends don't let friends line-dance.
  2. Why link to ZDNET Asia? by assantisz · · Score: 5, Informative

    This link is much faster (that is if you are in the USA, of course): Web site that evaluates open-source projects.

    1. Re:Why link to ZDNET Asia? by elrous0 · · Score: 4, Insightful
      The big problem with a lot of OSS project sites is the lack of basic information about what the software even *IS*. A lot of open source project sites feature build information, lists of patch fixes, etc. on their main page--all without ever explaining the basic info that people (esp. non-technical people) need to know. The are so into explaining the "how" of the software that they negelect to explain the "what" and "for who."

      The lack of documentation on OSS projects is bad enough without having to spend an hour just trying to figure out what the software even DOES.

      -Eric

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    2. Re:Why link to ZDNET Asia? by dieth · · Score: 3, Interesting
      The lack of documentation on OSS projects is bad enough without having to spend an hour just trying to figure out what the software even DOES.
      Have you ever read any of the documentation? Microsoft has always had the least documentation on any of there OS's or Programs, and the worst search engine to help you find it on on microsoft.com
    3. Re:Why link to ZDNET Asia? by truthsearch · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's ironic (considering this new site) that Microsoft has plenty to say about what their software is but lack in useful documentation. It's literally the opposite of OSS. Microsoft provides pleny of marketing to make sure everyone knows what they offer, yet for the technical they offer little help.

      --
      Developers: We can use your help.
    4. Re:Why link to ZDNET Asia? by gfxguy · · Score: 4, Interesting

      That's not really true. I use sourceforge a lot, for instance, and use their search. That narrows it down a bit, but then you want to make sure the software is right for you. The little synopsis doesn't provide enough detail. So I go to the project's home page, and I'm at a loss to tell you what the program actually does or what platforms it runs on; all I know is it has something to do with the something that I was looking for. Sure, sourceforge can narrow it down some, but it's not always accurate - and it doesn't really let you know that the Windows version differs from the Linux version which differs from the MacOS version...

      Sure, you can usually find out what you need to know if you do enough digging, but the home page of a project, I'd think, should be almost like a brochure. If people are really involved with the project and don't want or need to see that sort of thing, they can link directly to the nightly builds or release notes or something. I just don't think the home page of a project should be the release notes.

      I know a lot of open source programmers have a "take it or leave it mentality", because they've done it for free on their own time and to their own specifications... and that's fine, but you'd think they'd want to give potential new users an idea of whether or not the application fills their need. Even though you don't cry if someone decides not to use your work, it's still better to have more users than few users if you want your project to have any relevence in the long run... after all, if you've worked that hard on a project and release it for free for everyone to use, it's usually because you want other people to use it.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    5. Re:Why link to ZDNET Asia? by ozbird · · Score: 5, Informative

      The big problem with a lot of OSS project sites is the lack of basic information about what the software even *IS*.

      Hence sites like freshmeat.net - my first port of call if I know the kind of application I want, but not which one (or even what the available options are.)

      Maybe I'm getting cynical, this has the distinct smell of astroturf. How "Ohloh" can you go?

    6. Re:Why link to ZDNET Asia? by ch-chuck · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Why should they? What's the incentive? All most developers want to do is develope software and *if* it helps someone else, great, take a copy. It's not like they make more $$ for every customer who runs it. In fact, there's a big *disincentive* to inviting the clueless in - then the devs have to spend more time answering annoying newbie FAQ's over and over, troubleshoot their installation problems, etc. If the FOSS world, the more clueful users the better; the more clueless the worse. Ergo, if you don't know what it is, you probably don't want it. FOSS: you've got to *want* it - there are no marketeers out there trying to hunt down customers, ship them product and debit their account.

      --
      try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
  3. A reminder for all companies by Marcos+Eliziario · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Treat your employees well. They will still be around for a long time after they leave your company (unless, of course, your company is the mafia)

    --
    Your ad could be here!
  4. Term that they should have added by Rik+Sweeney · · Score: 2, Funny

    Slashdotted

    This is what happens to a site when Slashdot links to it on their front page.

    The irony of course is that no one would be able to read it when a Slashdotting occurs...

    --
    Summation 2
  5. Not to be outdone... by AngryDill · · Score: 4, Funny
    Larry Ellison has announced a new web site where he evaluates the benefits of PostgresQL and DB2! ;)

    -a.d.-

    --


    I'm Erwin Schrodinger and I approve of this message, and I do not approve of this message!
  6. Open Theft by Doomedsnowball · · Score: 4, Funny

    In related news, the start of a new project at Microsoft to figure out exactly how much code needs to be changed to patent OSS ideas and inline them into Vista. The lawyers say 80% of the comments need to be altered. The QA testers say 51% more bugs need to be added. And the developers say that you just need to change all the names of the variables, make pointers to everything you can, and cut-n-paste inline assembler code before the linker kicks in.

    --
    7h3$3 4r3n'7 7h3 Ðr01Ð$ ¥0 4r3 £00|{1n9 f0r. M0v3 4£0n9. --OB1
  7. Newbies guide to opensource by Kuku_monroe · · Score: 5, Funny

    Gettin' your feet wet' before diving into the large community of open source. Step 1: All Open source projects have weird name like "Ohloh"

    --
    //WR
  8. Redemption by Rob+T+Firefly · · Score: 4, Funny

    "Scott Collison!" I exclaimed. "But.. you left Microsoft!"

    "Collison?" He appeared pensive. "Yes... That's what they used to call me. Scott Collison. That was my name." He smiled.

    "Scott..?" I asked, confused.

    "I am Collison the White," he proclaimed, with a twinkle in his eye. "And I come back to you now at the turn of the tide."

    --
    Slashdot Burying Stories About Slashdot Media Owned
  9. I wonder why ... by rowama · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm having a hard time with this. I get the feeling this is a case of "If we (i.e., M$ employees) build it, they will come." Since ohloh has been slashdotted, I cannot tell if this is just a freshmeat knockoff (with a little sourceforge and krugle thrown in).

    The site is intended as a way for first-time OSS users to 'get their feet wet' before diving into the large community of open source projects out there.

    I got as far the frontpage (hehe), and I think newbies will be afraid to stick their feet in much less dive-in.

    Sorry, but I may not be seeing clearly through these suspicious eyes of mine. If so, my apologies to the ohloh folks. Also, welcome and aloha.

  10. Re:As Ackbar would say: by badfish99 · · Score: 3, Informative
    It's very slow, but I have managed to look at a couple of pages on the site.

    There's a line or so of information about each project (e.g. for Apache Ant it says "Apache Ant is a Java-based build tool", which is not very helpful). And then there's an estimate of the total cost of the project, based on an estimate of the number of man-years that have gone into the code, costed at $55k per man-year.

    WTF is that all about? Are these people perhaps trying to suggest that open-source software is valuable, and that its developers should charge for it?

  11. Re:Free Software Descriptions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    There's a pretty good source of popular free software application descriptions on Saugus.net's Computer Knowledgebase.

  12. SIgn me up! by shmert · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm most excited about a central place that does code reveiw of open-source projects. That's really a tedious process when you're wading around in sourceforge trying to find a shared lib for your project. Usually you can tell by the level of polish applied to the project's website how organized the code will be, but I'm certain some well-engineered software gets passed over if this is your only criteria for quality. Someone designing an open-source product shouldn't need to design a flashy website to promote it.

    If there were a comprehensive site I could visit that had evaluated (albeit briefly) some of these packages, that could be a big time-saver.

    --
    You drank my drink, you drunk!
  13. Freshmeat by ozmanjusri · · Score: 4, Informative
    It's hard to tell since their server's cactus, but it looks like it's imitating http://freshmeat.net/ (Disclaimer: another part of the nefarious OSTG network). Freshmeat is;
    • "searchable by project name or keyword, results in a list of suggested software."
    • "has a profile, beginning with a brief synopsis of what the software does."
    • "lists the licenses held for the open-source project, as well as a link to the full text of each license."
    • "offers information such as when the project was started, how many developers are actively working on it"
    • "the languages it uses"
    • "links to the project's home page"
    • "a breakdown of current activities"
    • etc
    and has done for donkey's years. These guys have learned MS techniques well...
    --
    "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
  14. ho | Ho by Tx · · Score: 2, Funny

    Reverse the name to get the true meaning:

    Ohloh -> ho | Ho

    Ex MS employees "helping" FOSS with a project called "ho | HO" (backwards)? Do I need to polish my tinfoil hat, or is that suspicious?

    --
    Oh no... it's the future.
    1. Re:ho | Ho by ichigo+2.0 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think that tinfoil hat is quite shiny enough.

  15. Years of work by truthsearch · · Score: 3, Interesting

    That is interesting. But what I'd really like to know is how they determined the time. I've never seen an OSS project which publishes how many hours of work when into writing it. It must be pure speculation. Since they're targeting the OSS illiterate too many people are going to believe these made-up numbers.

    --
    Developers: We can use your help.
  16. Opportunity cost by wolf87 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I think that the most interesting piece of the story has been missed. Ohloh is looking to create a paid service that will assess proprietary software for organizations. Combined with their open-source project DB, I see them building a set of tools that would enable IT managers to assess the relative costs & risks of different solutions far more easily. I would be looking for two developments to make this a reality. First, Ohloh would need to create an estimator of risk for each project based on the available data (a 'risk score'). Second, they would need a way to estimate the cost of customizing existing solutions (open-source & commercial). If they get both of these, they could provide a standardized, risk-adjusted measure of the opportunity cost associated with each development/deployment option. Really hope they are heading this way.

  17. Re:As Ackbar would say: by Jimmy+King · · Score: 2, Insightful
    "WTF is that all about? Are these people perhaps trying to suggest that open-source software is valuable, and that its developers should charge for it?" Stage 1: Establish tht open source has a cost in real money. Stage 2: Get Hired as consultants by microsoft to state this in press releases. .... well, you know the tune
    I don't think that's what they're going for. I think it's a more good intentioned "this is a rough estimate of what this software is worth if you were to develop it/this is what it cost the people who are now providing it to you". Of course, I can't imagine how it's accurate... are they figuring a 40 hr work week just on that software for each person involved for however long it's been in development? Are they using some estimate based on software is X lines of code and on average a developer can write Y lines of code per day/week/month/year?