Slashdot Mirror


SAP — Open Source Friend Or Foe ?

pavithran writes "Does SAP, one of the largest business companies offering software solutions, support FOSS as a movement? Why is SAP looking at closed and open source in a similar way? This shows lot of ambiguity in SAP's attitude towards open source software. I found an interesting article in Linux Journal on whether SAP is an open source friend or foe, by Glyn Moody. Here's a quote from the article: 'For an outfit that calls itself "the world's largest business software company," the German software giant SAP is relatively little-known in the open source world. With 51,500 employees, a turnover of 11.5 billion euros ($16 billion) last year, and operating profits of 2.7 billion euros ($3.8 billion), SAP is clearly one of the heavyweights in the computer world. Given that huge clout, SAP's attitude to open source is important; and yet it is hard to tell whether it is really free software's friend or its foe. ... A company that wished open source well would back these ideas. One that really supported free software would also fight against software patents. So, while SAP's involvement in Eclipse and investment in open source companies is welcome — and pretty self-interested, it has to be said, given that it presumably hopes to make a profit on them — it's not really enough cancel out its unhelpful attitude and statements elsewhere. If it wants to be a serious, respected player in the world of open source, as befits its size, it must do better.'"

37 of 155 comments (clear)

  1. Answer: Publicly Traded Company by linumax · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That is all.

    1. Re:Answer: Publicly Traded Company by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Bingo. Whose side is SAP on? SAP's.

      The question for the Open Source Community is how should Open Source relate to structurally self-interested entities? While the article's enumeration of SAP's relationship with Open Source is a useful starting point for discussion, framing the discussion as "Friend or Foe" is a misleading oversimplification.

    2. Re:Answer: Publicly Traded Company by WinterSolstice · · Score: 5, Insightful

      SAP has a track record of acting in only their own immediate term interest.

      For years, SAP was best buddies with Oracle - then they switched to being best buddies with IBM. Then they bought Adabase and made that atrocity that is SAPDB.
      Which they sold to MySQL.
      Which is now spun off yet again.
      Some products were Windows only for a very long time, and the GUI still is for the most part. The Java GUI is multi-platform, but still missing stuff.

      As a long term SAP admin (basis) and DBA, the only thing you can count on from SAP is random acts of chaotic self-interest.
      They don't play Friend or Foe, they just play Best Buddy of the Moment.

      --
      An operating system should be like a light switch... simple, effective, easy to use, and designed for everyone.
    3. Re:Answer: Publicly Traded Company by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 2, Funny

      They don't play Friend or Foe, they just play Best Buddy of the Moment.

      I hear they do have a very long-standing contract with the American Psychiatric Association to supply clients, though.

  2. I love the black and white thinking here.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You must be a friend or foe, you can't be neutral on the subject. I prefer to use Linux without the dogma attached it it.

    It's non-starter.

    1. Re:I love the black and white thinking here.... by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 5, Funny

      Besides, it's obvious that SAP's real enemy is its users.

    2. Re:I love the black and white thinking here.... by rbrausse · · Score: 2, Interesting

      why is this modded as "funny"? I lost ~ 20 years of my life with roll-outs of SAP R/3 in hospitals...

      [but I have to admit, the software is impressive. only the human kind is not sophisticated enough to handle this monster]

    3. Re:I love the black and white thinking here.... by WinterSolstice · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Because there isn't a +5 "Freaking sad but true" mod.

      --
      An operating system should be like a light switch... simple, effective, easy to use, and designed for everyone.
  3. I had the same reaction by Presto+Vivace · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why can't a company use FOSS when it is appropriate and proprietary when it suits their customers best? Software should not be a religious issue.

    1. Re:I had the same reaction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No, you (or anyone else) deciding how I license and distribute my software is unethical.

      Don't force your "ethics" on me.

    2. Re:I had the same reaction by Brett+Buck · · Score: 2, Funny

      Why can't a company use FOSS when it is appropriate and proprietary when it suits their customers best? Software should not be a religious issue.

            HERETIC! Burn him!

    3. Re:I had the same reaction by MrMista_B · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And it never is, ever.

      What it /is/, however, is an ideological issue, always. Your software ideology, for example, is that a company should use FOSS where appropriate and propriety when it suits their customers best.

    4. Re:I had the same reaction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Simple. Non-free software is unethical.

      What kind of "free" do you mean?

      Totally free, or GNU "free-with-conditions".

      Because once you start attaching conditions like the GPL does, it's not totally free anymore, now is it?

    5. Re:I had the same reaction by Tranzistors · · Score: 2

      No, you (or anyone else) deciding how I license and distribute my software is unethical.

      Yes, it is unethical, but no one is deciding how to licence your software but you. However, I do not see ethical problems in frowning upon software license that is hostile (towards free/open source community in this case).

      Don't force your "ethics" on me.

      American, aren't ya? If my ethics says "killing cows for food and stuff is bad", it might bit over the top to toss buckets of blood at diners in steak restaurant.
      However, if it is more like "thou shall not deceive", I find it perfectly reasonable to be mad at lying politicians.

      You see, this is more of a matter of common good (what was it about freedoms and where they meet?). If SAP is somehow hurting people, we should find it out and react accordingly.

    6. Re:I had the same reaction by digsbo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm not sure if they're hurting everyone, but I know SAP is hurting their customers by charging enormous amounts of money for poorly implemented systems that give the PHBs in Finance the illusion of control, while simultaneously hindering anyone actually trying to accomplish anything productive. Yes, I've used their stuff.

  4. FOSS Zealotry at its finest by Dog-Cow · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If Open Source is a Movement, you should see a proctologist. SAP doesn't need to be a friend nor a foe to it. They can and should be indifferent, as should 99.9999999999% of the world.

    The ideology is simply unimportant in the grand scheme of things. Only zealots feel a need to paint everyone in black and white.

    1. Re:FOSS Zealotry at its finest by msuarezalvarez · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The ideology is simply unimportant in the grand scheme of things.

      That is false both in this context and in all contexts.

  5. OSS is not a religion to everyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    To some people FOSS is just software to get work done. So they use it where they see fit. They contribute where they see benefit. But they don't sacrafice themselve to the holy crusade of FOSS.

    Actually I would say this is how FOSS should work. If FOSS would have to rely on the altruism of companies it would be doomed. I don't think it is.

  6. It's pretty simple by geekoid · · Score: 4, Insightful

    SAP support Open Source in any tool that allows them to develop and interact with their product.
    The gnomes of SAP will never open SAP up.

    If you have ever looked at SAP structure or code you don't want that box open~

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    1. Re:It's pretty simple by novasoy · · Score: 3, Informative

      Agreed. You don't want to look at your code. ABAP gives me a headache, and the way SAP designs their code.... I guess I'm just not smart enough to follow what's going on after the 20th INCLUDE within an INCLUDE within an INCLUDE. It's poorly documented, and usually the comments [in the code] are in German.

    2. Re:It's pretty simple by sunking2 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No, they aren't open source. You have to buy it from them and are not allowed to distribute/sell your modifications and there are quite a few strings attached to receiving it. The source is simply a product deliverable.

      It's similar to the free as in beer argument. Or maybe more accurately the coke dealer giving the first hit free knowing you'll come back for more services. Most consider Open Source an ideology, and SAP certainly does not drink that punch. They are all about generating revenue through providing services. Giving you the source when you buy it opens up the door for providing more services to the customer who now believes because they have the source its a good idea to bastardize it and make future upgrades next to impossible without spending tons of money.

  7. As an employee... by VorpalRodent · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I don't have a lot of exposure to the sales side of things. I'm an engineer and will work on support calls as needed. However, I can say that internally, I have not witnessed any sort of stigma against it. We've recommended open source solutions for customers as workarounds for issues and have used open source tools internally where appropriate. Everything I've seen suggests that it is viewed like anything else - a potential tool that our customers may or may not benefit from, if used correctly. We build many products on many variants of Linux (which can be viewed as supporting those customers who support and use open source software).

    I admit that it sounds mighty idealistic, but at the same time, like many of the earlier posters, I wholly agree that it is quite possible to take a more neutral stance on the issue. It's not limited to only friends and enemies.

    At the same time, I've been involved with discussions with legal ensuring that GPL'd code is not present in software products I am responsible for as a matter of protection of corporate interests.

    --
    Take it to the limit, everybody to the limit, come on, everybody fhqwhgads.
    1. Re:As an employee... by Sasayaki · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Everything I've seen suggests that it is viewed like anything else - a potential tool that our customers may or may not benefit from, if used correctly.

      This is how all software should be, in my opinion. Creating a zealous movement around it (be that Apple, Linux or Microsoft) does nobody any good. Pieces of software are tools; sometimes you just want a hammer to run games (Windows), sometimes you want a saw to host a web server (Linux), sometimes you want a screwdriver to boost your 'hip' score (Apple).

      Use the correct tool and your life will forever be easier. The Free Software Movement is very important and cool, but ultimately when you find a nail you better have a hammer.

      --
      Check out my sci-fi book "Lacuna" at http://goo.gl/MVxX8
    2. Re:As an employee... by jchawk · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Idealistic or not you hit the nail on the head with your post.

      Plenty of companies look at software as a tool similar to a hammer or a lathe. Which model or version of the hammer will get the job done for me in the most cost-effective manner.

      I work for a large industrial manufacture and we are deploying plenty of Linux right along side HP-UX, Microsoft 2003, AS400 and Mainframe. What tool makes the most sense for the problem we are trying to solve?

      I honestly believe the longer you work for a for profit company the more you start to understand the statement "Choose the right tool for the job."

    3. Re:As an employee... by migla · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "Use the correct tool and your life will forever be easier. The Free Software Movement is very important and cool, but"

      I bet, that for life to "forever be easier", every tool will have to be a Free tool. In other words, I claim that openness and freedom are necessary components of any ideal (as in perfect) tool.

      Granted, we're not there yet, but it's good that some people are ideological and looking into the future.

      --
      Some of my favourite people are from th US; Vonnegut, Chomsky, Bill Hicks.
  8. SAP can be friends with both by juanergie · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Every software company benefits from Open Source, whether they'd like to admit it or not. They can peek in the Open Source world and find implementation tricks or functional paradigms and apply them to their products. Maybe even embed some GPL applications into a larger proprietary suite.

    I believe SAP will not give up its competitive advantage by fully embracing Open Source if this translates into reduced profits; it does not make economic sense. However, SAP can be supportive (at least non obtrusive) of Open Source to further leverage whatever advantages it may provide and, secondarily, keep the die-hard computer programmers marginally happy.

    --
    Aeroespacio.org
  9. I do not understand this attitude by slashdotlurker · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I use open source software extensively in my work. I have also contributed open source code (not all GPL, but a good fraction of it is). I like open source for many things.

    However, I do not understand this expectation that software companies should help open source. Microsoft is a special case - it tried to work with hardware vendors to delay the rise of Linux, Openoffice, etc. However, when it comes to pure software competition, a company that makes its living off software (and is not interested in the pure free-software-pay-for-support model than open source encourages) cannot be expected to act against its own financial interests to earn brownie points from the open source crowd.

    Sometimes those interests will mandate open source participation. Other times, they won't. Interested in getting them to support open source ? Change market conditions to make it their interest to participate in open source. Open source might be religion to some, but it is simply an instrument for most of us. Pretty good instrument in most cases, but nothing more.

  10. OpenERP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Nice true open source alternative to SAP:
    http://openerp.com/

  11. SAP is open source by ingo23 · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Technically speaking, SAP is probably one of the first companies to distribute the source code with their product. Any company that purchased an SAP product gets complete source code for the business application (except for the core, which is more like an OS). One does not even need to apply for access to it, the whole application part is developed in an interpreted language with the source, IDE, and debugger readily available.

    The article complains that SAP does not support all the OSS community initiatives (as if nobody in OSS world ever has had any disagreement) and backs software patents.
    As a software development company, SAP has no other choice than to hold on to their patent portfolio, even if for defense reasons. I am not saying that SAP will (or have) never sue anyone for patent infringement, but I have not heard of any widely publicized case of them doing so.

    1. Re:SAP is open source by lordholm · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "As a software development company, SAP has no other choice than to hold on to their patent portfolio, even if for defense reasons."

      Is that why SAP was one of the largest actors in pro software patents campaign in Europe? I'd respect an opinion like the one from Oracle where they stated that they don't like patents, but since they exist they must use them for defensive reasons. SAP on the other hand put huge sums of money into actually trying to legalise software patents in the EU where they are not legal at all.

      --
      "Civis Europaeus sum!"
  12. Re:SAP - What Do They Do? by sakdoctor · · Score: 5, Funny

    They let you optimize your business performance with integrated solutions.

    I can tell by the generic photos of smiling business people, that they can maximize my ROI with their virtual collaboration packages.

  13. It's a Mistake... by SwashbucklingCowboy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... to treat a large company such as SAP as monolithic.

    Some inside of SAP will be FOSS friends, some will be foes, some will be neither. It depends upon the individuals involved, their attitudes, roles and the incentives SAP gives them.

    1. Re:It's a Mistake... by werfu · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Indeed. I work for a multinational consultant firm (27k+ employee) and the official stance on open source isn't for or against either. If FOSS solutions are possible under a situation, that their TCO is less than their closed source equivalents and that the client is open to it, we usualy go the FOSS way. Most often its a mix of it. We use a lot of Java EE. Many Java EE containers use Tomcat as their application server too. We also use extensively Eclipse and customize it for our needs. Anyway... when you get to that size of company you can't have a global thinking against or for FOSS. Heck I know some guys that work at Microsoft that use Linux at home and do open source developpment too!

  14. It's *SAP* by Chris+Burke · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I agree the question is stupid, but for a different reason. We're talking about SAP. Whether you are in the FOSS or Closed Source camp doesn't matter. If you are on the side of sanity, then SAP is your foe. It's that simple.

    --

    The enemies of Democracy are
  15. SAP and Windows by j.leidner · · Score: 2, Insightful
    > Some products were Windows only for a very long time, and the GUI still is for the most part. The Java GUI is multi-platform, but still missing stuff.

    That's not quite the right perspective: it actually started out from a cross-platform position. When R/3 came out, it supported 15 platforms (e.g. most Unices), and only later did it become more and more Windows-dependent. Part of this was the desire to integrate SAP's R/3 GUI more closely with Microsoft Office.

    I was with the SAP basis technology group at the time.

  16. Friend or Foe ? by gearloos · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The debate is still open wether SAP is even it's own customers Friend or Foe!! I work at a ~20k employee company that went SAP this year. I have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING good to say about SAP. So I'll just shut up and keep my integrity, what little I have left heh

    --
    "Computers are a lot like Air Conditioners" "They both work great until you start opening Windows"
  17. Foe by Lord+Crowface · · Score: 3, Interesting

    They sold MaxDB to MySQL, who open sourced it. After MySQL and various contributors improved MaxDB to the point where it was useful, they bought it back and immediately closed the source. Those are pretty clearly the actions of a ardent foe of open source.