Updates from March, 2007 Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • Roberto Galoppini 8:53 pm on March 8, 2007 Permalink | Reply  

    Open Source Prize: the province of Rome launches a contest 

    ColosseoColosseo by Screenweek

    The Italian province of Rome is organising a contest for young Open Source software programmers, ‘Oggi programmo io’ (Today I code). Rome hopes the event will help foster the use of this type of software. The best three contestants will win 4.500, 2.500 and 1.000 euros.

    Participation in the contest is open to everybody between 18 and 24 years of age living in the province. The contestants need to develop a completely new application that may be based on existing Open Source software. It should provide an original solution to typical public administration tasks. The winning applications will be made available on the website of the province.

    The contest is an initiative of the the e-government department of the province of Rome. Its main objective is to provide young programmers in the province with incentives to develop Open Source software. It also aims to create a community around applications developed especially for local public administration.

    The software has to be submitted to the province before the end of March.

    Read the full news by the IDABC Open Source Observatory , and don’t forget to subscribe the monthly news service if interested in the European initiatives on Open Source.

     
    • Savio Rodrigues 1:47 pm on March 9, 2007 Permalink

      Sounds like a great idea!

      The only thing I wonder about is whether an 18-24 year old knows enough about government & public service tasks to know what “typical public administration tasks” are.

      I’d say that open source programmers program what they know (i.e. “scratch an itch” as ESR put it) or what they get paid to do (and someone or the community gives them direction in terms of what to build).

      Maybe if the contest gave a few examples of what government officials felt would makes their jobs easier and improve public service, that would help?

      In any case, it’s a great idea and hope it draws a lot of attention!

    • Roberto Galoppini 2:21 pm on March 9, 2007 Permalink

      I also doubt that young hackers might know public administration’s needs, but at the end of the day the initiative – by the way promoted by my friend Flavia Marzano – will hopefully draw a greater attention to OSS in the schools.

      Usually I am not in favour of OS projects public funded, and I will soon write a post about it, but educating students to code and share their programs it is definitely a good idea. Open Source it is here to stay, students applying will get their chance to learn from it.

  • Roberto Galoppini 7:20 pm on March 6, 2007 Permalink | Reply  

    Business Development: about going 100% Open Source 

    Matt Asay wrote a commentary about Alfresco’s shift to free, giving out spots on the process that bring some interesting issues to light.

    Alfresco answering the question whether it is feasible or not to be a pure open source player in the application space,is now taking its great chance to move from the corporate production model to an hybrid one. So while Alfresco will be soon symbioticly fostering a community around its product, it’s also clear that one size (business model) doesn’t fit all. Look at Funambol, taking advantage of a “pyramidal approach”, giving it away for free to end users and selling it to mobile operators. Could you imagine someone else layering users and customers that way?

    Open Source stree sign“Open Source street sign” by A. Svensson

    Meeting the needs of non commercial users might be difficult for an Open Source firm that has to consistently cope with short term profit goals. Alfresco’s trajectory was possible also because backed up by Venture Capitalists, allowing them to write Alfresco from scratch. It is worth to notice that others like SugarCRM despite raised big investments from VCs didn’t take the same direction, deciding to keep proprietary some extensions and plug-in. Then Vtiger eventually jumped into the market, showing that forcing users to become customers makes space for (more) disruptive competitors.

    “Semi-open source” products don’t pay in the long run, but they might well be a mean to achieve short-to-medium profit goals indeed.

    Matt Asay, telling about his first trip to Alfresco headquarters. wrote that the very reason to not go open at that stage was the fear:

    Fear that unless forced, customers wouldn’t buy what they could otherwise get for free.

    And so we worked through the quarter, gathering information on why enterprises bought from us. We had an excellent quarter, but we also got excellent feedback from our customers:

    They would buy from us, anyway, even if we gave them the code.

    Not all of them, mind you: most of Europe seemed to be running Alfresco (Community – then our only open source product) without paying us a centime. But we figured that these companies wouldn’t buy from us, anyway.

    Alfresco’s services makes a lot of sense for their customers, they buy maintenance and support, and, I guess, they would buy more from them, if available. My guess is that European users don’t turn into customers because there are no local system integrators proficient in Alfresco yet.

    The Application space might even have a smaller potential audience, but it is quite different from a commodity market where you need millions of users to get thousands of customers. Applications are designed for process/knowledge intensive companies, are often mission critical and need tuning and customization.
    First movers have good chances, neverthless listening users, sharing roadmap decisions, start and foster communities while making the open source choice an effective one, may be not for all.

    There are practical reasons for going 100% open source. I didn’t mention this above, but our engineering team perhaps hated our hybrid model most of all, because it forced them to maintain separate code branches [..]
    As a group, we also didn’t like the fact that we were chummy with the commercial open source world, but didn’t play much of a role in the community open source world.

    Start and Fostering communities, it’s really important. And it is not just matter to spread the value of your product to create customer pull. Leveraging communities might be difficult indeed, many Open Source firms fall in the corporate production idealtype category, missing the chance to shift to a more participative hybrid model. I see both MySQL and Sun working on a more symbiotic approach nowadays, and more will come. In fact FLOSSMetrics, an EC funded project, will soon show how, within known OS projects, a significant percentage of contributed code – sometimes more than 20% – come from developers outside the firm.

    Let us assemble“Let us assemble” by A. Svensson

    Perhaps protection was important early on. This is the big issue that I don’t know how to resolve. We felt over time that we didn’t need the proprietary trappings. But it’s possible that this coverage was just enough to help us launch and get into “orbit.” I think for companies that take a more organic-growth approach, as Larry Augustin espouses (and with which I largely agree), early protection is less important than early community growth. And I want to believe that community growth is always more important.

    But it’s an open question (no pun intended). One that I can’t really answer here because we weren’t 100% open initially, so I don’t know what our experience would have been, otherwise. I know that our revenues have exploded in parallel with the opening of our code, but I don’t think it’s fair to say that this was a consequence of our license changes. I think it was just a matter of having great code open and available. The real benefits of 100% open source code are mostly to come, I suspect.

    Despite Alfresco didn’t choose to be 100% from the very first release, it’s clear now that for them open source is not just a cost effective marketing tool. Going GPL was just the first step to build a community based development around their product. Once again, best whishes.

    Technorati Tags: Alfresco, Commercial Open Source, GPL, MPL, Sugar CRM, Vtiger

     
  • Roberto Galoppini 8:09 pm on March 1, 2007 Permalink | Reply  

    Open Source Prize: Final month for APC Chris Nicol FOSS Prize 2007 

    Chris NicolPersons or groups making easy for people to start using free and open source software are urged to apply for the APC Chris Nicol FOSS Prize 2007, a price named in honor of Chris Nicol, a famous FOSS advocate died in 2005. Chris talking about free and open source software said:

    What you get from working with other people [on FOSS development] is extremely rewarding. You get a way of collaborating with others, you get a human warmth that doesn’t exist in other areas, a sharing of skills and a lot of help from others.

    Also APC believe that computers and the internet should be used for making the world a better place and they are looking for initiatives that:

    • improve the accessibility to, knowledge of and/or usability of FOSS
      .
    • are user-oriented
      .
    • are documented so that others can learn from and replicate the model
      .
    • have demonstrable impact and have increased the number of people using FOSS on a day-to-day basis

    I invite interested person or group to fill the application form before the end of March.

    Technorati Tags: Chris Nicol, FOSS, APC

     
  • Roberto Galoppini 10:54 pm on February 28, 2007 Permalink | Reply  

    Drupal no-profit association is born: Press release 

    The Drupal Association announced the creation of a non-profit corporation to support and advance the Drupal CMS, an anglicized version of the Dutch word ‘druppel’, meaning ‘drop’. CMS. Drupal began as a hobby project and then turned into an international development community. Google sponsored Drupal through the Summer-of-Code initiative.

    As member of another just born association I symphatize with them, and I like their approach, as they will not be involved in decisions regarding the development or direction of the project.

    The Drupal Association will instead focus on the following efforts:

    • Accepting donations and grants.
      .
    • Organizing and/or sponsoring Drupal project-related events, and representing the Drupal project at events.
      .
    • Engaging in partnerships with other organizations.
      .
    • Acquiring and managing infrastructure in support of the Drupal project.
      .
    • Supporting development by awarding grants or paying wages.
      .
    • Writing and publishing press releases and promotional materials.

    I wish them the best of luck!

    Technorati Tags: drupal

     
    • Nirav Sheth 4:25 am on September 10, 2007 Permalink

      Drupal community is a great idea. I am really fascinated by community’s focus on acquiring and managing infrastructure in support of the drupal project. As an offshore software development company in India and our involvement in drupal projects and drupal solutions we like to help community in acquiring infrastructure. Such kind of steps takes drupal solution to next generation CMS.

    • Roberto Galoppini 7:44 am on September 10, 2007 Permalink

      Hi Nirav,

      are you coping with the association, at some extent?

      Besides the announcement, that is pretty rich of positive comments by the way, I didn’t know much about it.. do you?

  • Roberto Galoppini 5:02 pm on February 26, 2007 Permalink | Reply  

    OpenOffice.org Italian Association meets its first goal: Press release 

    “OpenOffice.org Italian Association meets its first goal”

    PLIO, 26th of February 2007 – The Association PLIO, the Italian community of volunteers who develop, support and promote the open-source office productivity suite, OpenOffice.org, has met the first goal of the yearly program: the inclusion of the Italian dictionary and thesaurus – released by Italian volunteers – in one of the next official versions of OpenOffice.org.

    In the very next future the full release (dictionary and thesaurus included) of OpenOffice.org Italian version, today available for download only by PLIO servers, will be available also by the official site.

    Sun Microsystems, OpenOffice.org primary sponsor and contributor, through the authoritative voice of Simon Phipps, Chief Open Source Officer of Sun, announced the decision on Roberto Galoppini’s blog. Galoppini had previously written an open letter to Simon Phipps on behalf of the Association asking help with Sun’s legal team to get a public comment about the implications of distributing the dictionary and the thesaurus with OpenOffice.org.

    Roberto Galoppini, one of PLIO’s historical members and recently appointed PLIO Institutional Relationship Manager, commented:

    Simon Phipps’s comment, nowadays the most visited page of my blog, returns a positive feedbacks from Sun’s lawyers and announces that the inclusion of our great facilities will proceed forthwith – and I guess before this summer we’ll get them included in the official version.

    The problem was due to a suspected licenses mismatch between the linguistic tools’ license and the openoffice.org one. I am convinced that the PLIO Association for Sun might be an important interlocutor within the OpenOffice.org community, and this is just the first goal in the direction to build a more collaborative dialogue.

    PLIO Association can be found at the following address: http://www.plio.it. PLIO is on duty for the Italian Native-Lang Project, that can be found at the following address: http://it.openoffice.org, where is available for download the last version of the suite, namely OpenOffice.org 2.1.

    Roberto Galoppini, commercial open source software and open source business models expert, founder of the first Italian open source consortium. His blog can be found at the following address: http://robertogaloppini.net.

    PLIO, the OpenOffice.org Italian Native-Lang Project, is the Italian community of volunteers who develop, support and promote the open-source office productivity suite, OpenOffice.org. OpenOffice.org supports the Open Document Format for Office applications (standard ISO/IEC 26300) and is available on major computing platforms in over 90 languages, available to 90% of the world-wide population in their own mother tongue.
    OpenOffice.org is provided under the GNU Lesser General Public Licence (LGPL), can be legally used in any context.

    PLIO, Progetto Linguistico Italiano OpenOffice.org:
    http://it.openoffice.org
    “Vola e fai volare con i gabbiani di OpenOffice.org: usalo, copialo e regalalo, è legale!”
    For further information: Italo Vignoli (+39.348.5653829), stampa@openoffice.org

     
  • Roberto Galoppini 1:29 pm on February 25, 2007 Permalink | Reply  

    Debian and business: HP making big money out of free Debian GNU/Linux 

    HP few months ago announced its support services for Debian, because as Jeffrey Wade, worldwide marketing manager at HP’s Open Source and Linux Organization, explained:

    We’ve had a number of customers continuing to ask us to have broader support for Debian. [Linux customers requested the Debian support, after wondering if they could get] a better value with a distribution that doesn’t require a subscription fee and subsequent renewals for that subscription.

    money andy warhol

    As recently reported by InternetNews HP in fiscal year 2006 $25 million in hardware sales in the EMEA area were directly related to HP’s Debian support.

    Hewlett-Packard is known to be a Linux Foundation supporter, as said Christine Martino, vice president, Open Source and Linux Organization of HP:

    HP has been a long-time member of both OSDL and FSG, and is proud to continue supporting the advancement of Linux and open source as a founding Board member of the Linux Foundation.

    HP is also an important Debian’s developer partner, and sponsors many other open source projects, but despite of all this HP is not even listed in the top ten business contributors in the now famous final report on the economic impact of FLOSS.

    HP was already supporting both Novell and Red Hat distros, and Wade commenting the somehow unexpected extremely good results due to Debian support said:

    Every additional distribution that we pick up is a big investment in testing and support which is a challenge from the service side. When we decided to do Debian, we had to figure out what the opportunity was and what sales we would generate.
    This information exceeds what we were expecting to see.

    As reported by Sean Wilson, IBM has also come on board the Debian support services bandwagon with their French partner Alcôve in order to to provide Debian support for their IBM Global Linux Support Line.

    Technorati Tags: Debian, HP, IBM, FLOSS

     
  • Roberto Galoppini 10:02 pm on February 19, 2007 Permalink | Reply  

    Business Development: Doc Searls on relationship economics 

    Doc Searls talking about the values that open source development methods can bring to the economy came up with an interesting old story from the developing world. Few years ago he met a Nigerian pastor named Sayo, sitting next to him on an airplane trip, and he was on his way to give a talk about The Cluetrain Manifesto, a book I would recommend to everyone in this market.
    Since Doc Searls was going to give a speech about the “Markets are conversations” chapter he spoke with Sayo about that, and he asked him what he meant by that.

    After his answer, Sayo said that Searls’ observations were incomplete, in his opinion something more was going on in markets, and he asked him what was it:

    I said I didn’t know. Here is the dialogue that followed, as close to verbatim as I can recall it…

    “Pretend this is a garment”, Sayo said, picking up one of those blue airplane pillows. “Let’s say you see it for sale in a public market in my country, and you are interested in buying it. What is your first question to the seller?”

    “What does it cost?” I said.

    “Yes”, he answered. “You would ask that. Let’s say he says, ‘Fifty dollars’. What happens next?”

    “If I want the garment, I bargain with him until we reach an agreeable price.”

    “Good. Now let’s say you know something about textiles. And the two of you get into a long conversation where both of you learn much from each other. You learn about the origin of the garment, the yarn used, the dyes, the name of the artist, and so on. He learns about how fabric is made in your country, how distribution works, and so on. In the course of this you get to know each other. What happens to the price?”

    “Maybe I want to pay him more and he wants to charge me less”.

    “Yes. And why is that?”

    “I’m not sure.”

    “You now have a relationship”.

    Doc Searls than shared that conversation with Eric S. Raymond, who told him that:

    All markets work at three levels. Transactions, conversations and relationships.

    Doc began to catch that there is something more to the relationship business:

    Development communities are notoriously long on conversation (check out the LKML for starters), and on relationship as well. Not a whole lot of transaction there, either, since the code is free. Next question: Are there economies involved?

    I think the answer is yes, and they are concentrated on the manufacturing end. We make useful code for its “because effects”. Thanks to Linux, much money will be made; but because of it, far more than with it.

    Read the full article, I found it inspirational if not informational.

     
  • Roberto Galoppini 7:59 pm on February 16, 2007 Permalink | Reply  

    Internet is for everyone: the Mozilla Manifesto 

    “The Internet is for Everyone” is the title of a quite famous RFC written almost five years ago by Vint Cerf, one of the “founding fathers” of the Internet. RFC 3271 doesn’t specify any Internet standard, but is a sort of global memo to remember us that we need to demand Internet freedom. Cerf was in his closing saying:

    Internet IS for everyone – but it won’t be unless WE make it so.

    On the 13th of February Mitchell Baker , President of the Mozilla Corporation, announced on her blog the availability of the Mozilla manifesto, which led me somehow back to the forementioned Internet for Everyone RFC.

    From her own post the Mozilla Manifesto’s goals:

    1. articulate a vision for the Internet that Mozilla participants want the Mozilla Foundation to pursue;
      .
    2. speak to people whether or not they have a technical background;
      .
    3. make Mozilla contributors proud of what we’re doing and motivate us to continue; and
      .
    4. provide a framework for other people to advance this vision of the Internet.

    Here the Mozilla Manifesto’s principles:

    1. The Internet is an integral part of modern life – a key component in education, communication, collaboration, business, entertainment and society as a whole.
      .
    2. The Internet is a global public resource that must remain open and accessible.
      .
    3. The Internet should enrich the lives of individual human beings.
      .
    4. Individuals’ security on the Internet is fundamental and cannot be treated as optional.
      .
    5. Individuals must have the ability to shape their own experiences on the Internet.
      .
    6. The effectiveness of the Internet as a public resource depends upon interoperability (protocols, data formats, content), innovation and decentralized participation worldwide.
      .
    7. Free and open source software promotes the development of the Internet as a public resource.
      .
    8. Transparent community-based processes promote participation, accountability, and trust.
      .
    9. Commercial involvement in the development of the Internet brings many benefits; a balance between commercial goals and public benefit is critical.
      .
    10. Magnifying the public benefit aspects of the Internet is an important goal, worthy of time, attention and commitment.

    I like the idea that the Mozilla project is more than simply releasing new versions of Firefox, and while I’m not involved in the Mozilla project I’m really willing to help.

     
  • Roberto Galoppini 8:42 am on February 16, 2007 Permalink | Reply  

    Free as in Culture: a possible definition of Free Cultural Works 

    Benjamin Mako Hill, a known Debian GNU/Linux developer, and Erik Möller, formerly Chief Research Officer at Wikimedia Foundation and currently Wikipedia author, almost one year ago joined to write a Free Content and Expression Definition. Two days ago a diverse group of writers released the first version of the “Definition of Free Cultural Works.”

    Benjamin, started thinking about the issue almost two years ago, explaining that unlike Free Software, Creative Commons in his opinion failed to set any standard of freedom. Then he argued that:

    Creative Commons and the free culture movement were struggling to build a cohesive freedom movement in the way that free and open source software had succeeded in doing by never stopping to define the ground rules of the commons movement.

    I argued that Free Software built a movement around calls for essential freedoms and against the actions of software producers who failed to live up to this standard. On the other hand, Creative Commons has argued for “some rights reserved” but never explained which rights were unreservable. In the process, they’ve done the invaluable service of creating a stable of powerful, internationalized licenses. But they failed to build the type social movement that some of us wanted. While this was never their goal, it left some people unsatisfied.

    He later made it more clear with a second version:

    Whether in unison or cooperating in separate groups, it is time for those those of us that feel strongly about freedom to discuss, decide, and move forward with our own free information movement built upon a standard of freedom. When we have defined free information in terms of essential freedoms, a subset of Creative Commons works and a subset of Creative Commons licenses will provide tools and texts through which a social movement can be built.

    Then Larry Lessig introduced him to Erik Möller, who was planning on launching the same project, and from theit collaboration came up the Free Content and Expression Definition and, just few days ago along with other the release 1.0 of the Definition of Free Cultural Works.

     
  • Roberto Galoppini 5:06 pm on February 7, 2007 Permalink | Reply  

    DRM: Steve Jobs opinion 

    Steve Jobs, Apple CEO, yesterday got into the DRM debate with a insightful post on the matter. Since many players have been asking Apple to open up its DRM system from some time now, and considering that citizens and associations are starting to reject DRM, Steve Jobs decided to examine the current situation suggestingt three possible alternatives for the future.

    While iPods can play music DRM-free, iTunes sells music enveloped in a DRM mechanism, making impossible to play it on other devices, locking users into Apple’s ecosystem.

    The first alternative is to continue on the current course, with each manufacturer competing freely with their own “top to bottom” proprietary systems for selling, playing and protecting music. [..]
    Some have argued that once a consumer purchases a body of music from one of the proprietary music stores, they are forever locked into only using music players from that one company. Or, if they buy a specific player, they are locked into buying music only from that company’s music store. Is this true? Let’s look at the data for iPods and the iTunes store – they are the industry’s most popular products and we have accurate data for them. Through the end of 2006, customers purchased a total of 90 million iPods and 2 billion songs from the iTunes store. On average, that’s 22 songs purchased from the iTunes store for each iPod ever sold.

    Today’s most popular iPod holds 1000 songs, and research tells us that the average iPod is nearly full. This means that only 22 out of 1000 songs, or under 3% of the music on the average iPod, is purchased from the iTunes store and protected with a DRM. The remaining 97% of the music is unprotected and playable on any player that can play the open formats. Its hard to believe that just 3% of the music on the average iPod is enough to lock users into buying only iPods in the future. And since 97% of the music on the average iPod was not purchased from the iTunes store, iPod users are clearly not locked into the iTunes store to acquire their music.

    Here Steve Jobs is strechting the truth. I believe that “only” 22 songs on average are bought by iTunes, but I think that an iTunes’s customer is buying more than 22 songs, and I can hardly believe he is buying them somewhere else. Last but not least I can’t believe that every iPod is containing 1000 songs, while I know that it can’t hold more of them.

    The second alternative is for Apple to license its FairPlay DRM technology to current and future competitors with the goal of achieving interoperability between different company’s players and music stores. On the surface, this seems like a good idea since it might offer customers increased choice now and in the future. And Apple might benefit by charging a small licensing fee for its FairPlay DRM. However, when we look a bit deeper, problems begin to emerge. The most serious problem is that licensing a DRM involves disclosing some of its secrets to many people in many companies, and history tells us that inevitably these secrets will leak. The Internet has made such leaks far more damaging, since a single leak can be spread worldwide in less than a minute. [..]
    Apple has concluded that if it licenses FairPlay to others, it can no longer guarantee to protect the music it licenses from the big four music companies.

    I see his point, it makes perfect sense: no way to build gates in front of the sea.

    The third alternative is to abolish DRMs entirely. Imagine a world where every online store sells DRM-free music encoded in open licensable formats. In such a world, any player can play music purchased from any store, and any store can sell music which is playable on all players. This is clearly the best alternative for consumers, and Apple would embrace it in a heartbeat.[..]

    Why would the big four music companies agree to let Apple and others distribute their music without using DRM systems to protect it? The simplest answer is because DRMs haven’t worked, and may never work, to halt music piracy. [..]

    In 2006, under 2 billion DRM-protected songs were sold worldwide by online stores, while over 20 billion songs were sold completely DRM-free and unprotected on CDs by the music companies themselves. The music companies sell the vast majority of their music DRM-free, and show no signs of changing this behavior, since the overwhelming majority of their revenues depend on selling CDs which must play in CD players that support no DRM system.[..]

    Much of the concern over DRM systems has arisen in European countries. Perhaps those unhappy with the current situation should redirect their energies towards persuading the music companies to sell their music DRM-free. For Europeans, two and a half of the big four music companies are located right in their backyard. The largest, Universal, is 100% owned by Vivendi, a French company. EMI is a British company, and Sony BMG is 50% owned by Bertelsmann, a German company. Convincing them to license their music to Apple and others DRM-free will create a truly interoperable music marketplace. Apple will embrace this wholeheartedly.

    I’m with you Steve, help us to do it!

    Read the full story.

     
c
Compose new post
j
Next post/Next comment
k
Previous post/Previous comment
r
Reply
e
Edit
o
Show/Hide comments
t
Go to top
l
Go to login
h
Show/Hide help
shift + esc
Cancel