Recent Updates Page 115 Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • 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.

     
  • Roberto Galoppini 6:00 pm on February 6, 2007 Permalink | Reply  

    Open Source Consortia: Measure twice, cut once 

    The Open Forum Europe (TOF-E) is a group of European suppliers told to trial a franchisee approach. Googling around I found the following (old) news about the TOFe EC funded project:

    The Open Forum-Europe (TOF-E) raises awareness of open source software and the benefits it can bring to European public and private sectors. TOF-E will accomplish this goal by establishing Internet portals that will help users select software based upon their current and future needs.

    The declared aim of the Open Forum Europe project is:

    The aim of The OpenForum Europe (TOF-e) project is to put certainty and commercial clarity into the whole Open Source process. It will assist SMEs, Enterprises and the Public Sector in the pragmatic adoption and support of OSS by intermediating between business users and the OSS developers, integrators and support community across Europe.
    TOF-e represents the specific market validation phase of this eTEN project to rollout TOF-e across Europe and consists of 3 local portals in Denmark, Ireland and the UK.

    I must admit the portal doesn’t help much, it contains a link to OpenOffice.org website, a practical course in StarOffice 8 that you can buy there 38.50€ and, last but not least, a “useful tool“:

    Certified Openâ„¢ is designed to help measure and encourage competition through the provision of a framework for evaluating technical and commercial lock-in where that may reduce the ability of suppliers to compete in the provision of software, hardware and services.

    Unfortunately the site doesn’t offer any further information about the “useful tool”, so far it looks like if we can’t get much out of the portal. The EC-funded projects, started in September 2005 is supposed to close soon (February 2007) and I am afraid we have no real chance to see the TOF-E promise realized:

    In Europe there is perceived to be substantial opportunity to create new ICT opportunity for SMEs, and for the creation of a new ICT market, particularly in new Member States. However, independent research, including that undertaken by OpenForum Europe has observed that a number of inhibitors to success remain. Key amongst these is current lack of a comprehensive, yet locally available, access to advice and guidance; perceived lack of skills both within the user and with support partners.
    TOF-e is being launched as a commercial electronic intermediary focussed on the needs of government and business and aimed at the Director, Senior Management, Business Users and their Business Advisors (Accountants, Administrators, Legal and Financial Advisors, Procurement Officers, Banks and SME business advisors) based in a particular community. SME potential users and suppliers will be particular beneficiaries.

    Getting back to the title, if you are not running an (externally) public funded project, I agree with Gianugo advising on using consortia to do actual business:

    [..] my experience shows there’s nothing harder than have individuals with a strong personality such as entrepreneurs sit around a table and agree on a detailed common roadmap. Democracy is definitely a poor governance model when it comes to business: a strong company, with proper hierarchies and delegation structures in place, is much more effective when it comes to getting to the market.

    It just doesn’t work, no matter how I love my fellow Orixians. Consortia are great for networking, getting to know each other better, share experiences and market approaches, understand joint business opportunities and work on actual cross-company business: that’s great stuff, but don’t try to push the boundary, as when it comes to concrete business it’s just too hard to cope with the sheer amount of management that kicks in. It’s a full time job.

    Yes, it’s a full time job, in two years I spent more than 600 hours on consortium’s activities when I was the president of the CIRS Italian consortium, and I must admit it’s true that SMEs tend to have short-term perspectives. Members usually can’t afford medium to long term investments and look for quick results, making difficult if not impossible sharing a common strategic approach.

     
  • Roberto Galoppini 10:00 am on February 6, 2007 Permalink | Reply  

    Mobile Linux: the first full Open Source stack released 

    The open source GPE project yesterday announced a new project to create a fully open source software stack for mobiles, named GPE Phone Edition.

    GPE Phone Edition is a fully open source project based on developments from the GPE project adding necessary components for mobile phone usage. Based on standards defined by the LiPS Forum a complete application software stack is built. The current implementation is based on code contributed to the LiPS Forum by Orange/France Telecom’s research and development lab located in Beijing China in collaboration with GPE project members.

    Key features of the current implementation are:

    • application development and runtime framework
      .
    • voice call framework and application
      .
    • mobile phone suitable PIM application such as addressbook and calendar
      .
    • SMS messaging framework and application
      .
    • instant messaging framework and application
      .
    • multi media playback framework and applications

    The project provides all relevant sourcecode through the service of LinuxToGo, an open source collaboration site dedicated to mobile Linux developments.

    The sourcecode is accompanied by a demonstration environment built using the popular Open Embedded build system. It can be run as a VMware virtual machine providing almost full mobile phone features if connected to a mobile phone’s modem. The project now calls for hardware manufacturers to open their devices so that the software stack can be adopted to a wide variety of mobile phones.

     
  • Roberto Galoppini 10:33 pm on February 5, 2007 Permalink | Reply  

    Open Format: ODF Translator 1.0 for Word available! 

    The long awaited OpenXML Translator 1.0 is now available for download. The project, started last year, is now available in five languages (but not in Italian yet).

    OpenXML Translator allow you to open open ODF documents in Microsoft Word. Microsoft says it has been tested on Office 2007, Office 2003, and Office XP.

    Test cases included scenarios as the conversion of an EU law document into another EU language by an external translation provider using OpenOffice.org or an EU parliament’s member requesting the draft version of a national law document from a public body using OpenOffice.org. The translator was also tested against the University’s of Central Florida test suite for ODF.
    Tom Robertson, general manager for interoperability and standards at Microsoft, said:

    The translator project has been built to be independent of any one application, and has proved to be useful for both Microsoft and our competitors in solving an interoperability challenge for customers.

    Novell has announced that the translator will be natively implemented in its next version of OpenOffice.org, if interested you need to sign up for the Novell beta program.

    Support for Excel and PowerPoint documents are scheduled for November 2007.

     
    • Sam Hiser 1:52 am on February 6, 2007 Permalink

      Note the system resource consumption of the Microsoft-Clever Age-Novell Translator’s C# routines and the fidelity of your document conversions, then come to the OpenDocument Foundation for an honest conversion mechanism.

      You’re all waiting for Microsoft to provide interoperability? Have you paused long enough to recognize the irony of this situation?

      We’ll be talking soon.

    • Roberto Galoppini 9:28 am on February 6, 2007 Permalink

      Hi Sam, I would be happy to write about th OpenDocument Foundation plug-in, keep me updated please, I might eventually use it to upgrade the DocTransformer indeed.

  • Roberto Galoppini 5:09 pm on February 5, 2007 Permalink | Reply  

    Corporate blog: IDC Conference on Content&Document Management 

    Nonetheless I am no Robert Scoble, I’m honored to have been invited by FIDAInform, the National Federation of the Associations of Information Management Professionals, to give a speech about Corporate Blogging by the IDC Content & Document Management Conference 2007 held last tuesday here in Rome.

    Being a neo-blogger I took the chance to share with the audience, mostly Public Administration managers, a little bit of my own experience and insights into what I have learn in the last few months.

    I started talking about the five key things that have influenced corporate blogging:

    1. The blogosphere dimension
      doubling every 236 days, 100 times bigger than 3 yrs ago;
      .
    2. Mainstream media vs blog
      only 3 blog in the first 50 positions, but the “long tail” belongs to blogs;
      .
    3. People talk
      the value created by group-forming network grows exponentially with members:
      .
    4. Push vs Pull
      web feed formats changed the way we keep ourselves informed;
      .
    5. Blogging
      is simple.

    Then I gave few examples showcasing the above issues at work.

    External blogs.
    I mentioned how blogs can be Marketing’s nightmare and dream, or tools to leverage market conversations. Networked market often knows more than companies do about their own products. Blogs might help also to build connections with key audiences. An external corporate blog through transparency might add a level of credibility unobtainable from standard media, like showing a different side of the company.

    Internal Blogs.
    To open to the whole organisation the decision making process blogs can avoid the hierarchical vertical confirmation process, exploiting lateral thinking and collective intelligence potentialities. The blog becomes also the written memory of the organization, replacing emails, which are not the best information sharing tool.

    Feeds.
    Posts and comments are easy to reach and follow without the need to visit the blog, either if it is an internal or external one. Within an organization RSS spam-free method can easily discover any sort of information through basic search applications, making financial or technical news at hand. Last but not least the cost of producing RSS content is mostly negligible. To see how a feed-reader works I suggest to try on-line tools: Andrea Martines developed Excite-MIX a really easy to use widgeted page.

    My Experience.
    I started blogging just three months ago, and I keep talking daily about Corporate Blogging with Robin Good and Nicola Mattina. I have also signed up for some “persistent news searches” using “corporate blog” as my search keyword.

    I also work very hard to make mistakes, so that I can always learn something new.

     
  • Roberto Galoppini 7:27 pm on February 3, 2007 Permalink | Reply  

    Public Thank You to Simon Phipps, Chief Open Source Officer at Sun Microsystems 

    Dear Simon,

    I’m glad to hear from your voice that the Italian dictionary and thesaurus will be soon included in the offical version of our beloved office suite OpenOffice.org.

    Hi Roberto.

    I’ve looked into this and the problem was that, by using the GPL rather than the LGPL for your contribution, it was necessary for Sun’s legal team to conduct an extensive discussion about the implications of distributing it with OpenOffice.org (which as you know is licensed under LGPL), and that discussion was disrupted by staffing changes in mid-stream. Some delay in public comment was inevitable because of the fact you’d used a license the OpenOffice.org community has not chosen and because seeking legal advice in the US is necessarily a confidential matter under US law. I apologise for the extra delay that was unavoidably caused by the staffing changes.

    I have now received legal advice that gives me confidence that inclusion of this great facility will be OK from a licensing perspective, and it will proceed forthwith. I’d like to thank you and your team for both your important contribution to OpenOffice.org and for your patience waiting for the process to complete.

    S.

    On behalf of the the Italian Native-Lang Project team, who yesterday announced to have become an Association, I wish to thank you publicly for your job, you have been able to solve a problem we were dealing with from months.

    Mille grazie! (Thanks a lot!)

     
    • Conficio 4:50 am on February 5, 2007 Permalink

      Congratulation to the Italian Native Language project to get your contributions for OpenOffice.org included.

      K
      Chief screencast(er) t Plan-B for OpenOffice.org

    • Roberto Galoppini 11:11 am on February 6, 2007 Permalink

      Hi Kay,
      I had a look into “Plan-B for OpenOffice.org” a public beta test support website in the form of animated software manuals. It looks really interesting.
      Is the framework open source as well? Has the project a free-entrance mechanism?

    • Savio Rodrigues 2:58 pm on February 6, 2007 Permalink

      Nice work Roberto & team!

      I wonder whether the time it took Sun to accept the code also had to do with checking for IP & copyright ownership.

      I’ve experienced how long such a task can take when a large vendor is involved with distributing OSS code. Large vendors are large litigation targets and need to protect themselves by doing a good deal of due diligence.

      I’ve written about my experience with IBM WAS Communality Edition here.

    • Roberto Galoppini 3:36 pm on February 6, 2007 Permalink

      As far as I know legal advice took time, no copyright check had been done about the dictionary or the thesaurus (no code inside, but copyright still applies indeed) as far as I know.

      By the way I happened to know that a public funded Italian institute did the dictionary and/or the thesaurus used by Microsoft’s products, but for copyright’s reasons it has not been donated to OpenOffice.org.

      We don’t hear much about those “background checks” because (I guess) OSS vendors don’t do many checks. Indemnification sounds an insurance business to me, not that big indeed..

    • backgroundcheck 5:57 pm on June 20, 2007 Permalink

      Hi Roberto –

      As an Italian speaker and user of openoffice.org, I appreciate your efforts to get Italian included!

      Thank you –

      Trina

  • Roberto Galoppini 11:18 am on February 2, 2007 Permalink | Reply  

    OpenOffice.org Italian Association is born: Press release 

    The OpenOffice.org Italian Native-Lang Project (PLIO) invites you to its first OpenOffice.org press conference in Italy.

    “OpenOffice.org grows up”

    PLIO today becomes an Association, reveals its programs for 2007 and supplies evaluations of OpenOffice.org’s market penetration.
    With OpenOffice.org 2.0 market acceptance improved just everywhere, as shown by the last six months results, and Italy is doing really well.
    Such growth demands a better allocation and management of existing resources, requiring an organization able to hold system-wide conversations. For this reason, PLIO’s members – till now a group of volunteers – decided to found an Association of volunteers to better address growing market needs.

    The Association will be responsible for fund raising and to allocate resources for commons production. Panel will include:

    • Davide Dozza, Association’s President and Co-Maintainer of of the Italian Native-Lang Project,
      .
    • Andrea Pescetti, Co-Maintainer of the Italian Native-Lang Project and Quality assurance responsible,
      .
    • Italo Vignoli, Councilman and Marketing responsible

    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 12:57 pm on February 1, 2007 Permalink | Reply  

    Business development: some considerations 

    “Successfull commercial open source” by Alex Fletcher, reports some interesting “must” for being a successful commercial open source firm, mostly related to deploy a strategy to balance community and business interests.

    Among them I agree with the following:

    • Meets the needs of non-commercial users: Products which leave open source versions woefully lacking in an attempt to force the purchase of commercial versions/licenses just can’t cut it over the long haul. Open source isn’t tease-ware for proprietary code, even if a commercial version is available separately from a community cut.
      .
    • Actively encourage ecosystem: An ecosystem is what springs up around a useful and trustworthy product. Red Hat has been able to do what it takes to cultivate a self-sustaining ecosystem surrounding its Linux suite by building out a partner network fit with multiple support channels.
      .
    • Continually leverage community: Finding creative ways to enable a participating community to feed value back into a product and even the commercial operation(s) behind it remains key. Funambol can boast of a global Q&A team because they found ways to stimulate its growth and development.
      .
    • Provide some sort of IP indemnification a.k.a. CYA: Will Price might have put it best.
      .
    • Strong open source foundation: Whether code is developed primarily through community (i.e. PostgreSQL) or company (i.e. ActiveGrid) driven efforts, the basic principles of an open source development model should be at the core of such efforts. Transparency at every appropriate level of community governance can provide an assurance of commitment to open approaches..
      .

    Semi-open source products don’t pay: upselling from the open source version to a more feature-rich version doesn’t pay, non-commercial users will not pay anyway. Consider also that one day another commercial open source player will deliver the missing plug-ins and modules.  While for the time being it might be a rewarding tactic, it doesn’t work in the long run, you need something else to retain your customers.

    Ecosystems are crucial, no matter if you’re an open source firm or a proprietary one.
    But there is a difference between a proprietary channel and and an open source one: for the latter you better spend time and effort to select your partners, if they don’t really know how to deliver value you might loose prospects.

    Indemnification, I believe it makes a lot of sense in US, so far despite the efforts of lobbysts, Europe is still patent free, so the whole IP thing is not important yet.
    Though I believe that CYA is really important for any CIO when he/she has to define SLAs, to get things working as needed.

    Fostering communities, it’s really, really important: Fletcher cited Funambol and I totally agree, they have been very good at leveraging their community. Not that easy indeed. I see some OSS firms falling in the corporate idealtype production model category trying to shift to a more participative hybrid model (MySQL, Sun just to name two of them).

    A strong open source foundation is a nice to have for many new Open Source firms, but few are already implementing effective approaches. In other words, for many open source is a cost effective marketing tool, not a community based development.

    Among them I disagree with the following:

    • Choose the proper time to commercialize: Too much commercial influence from the onset can potentially stunt the growth of a surrounding community/user base.. .
      .

    If we talk about Commercial Open Source firms I think that the proper appropriate time is as soon as possible, and I strongly believe the commercial influence is not the issue when coping with communities. Most of the Problems come from poor transparency decision systems, project managers with no appropriate skills to work in a mix environment, scarse or not existent rewarding mechanisms.

     
  • Roberto Galoppini 1:28 am on February 1, 2007 Permalink | Reply  

    Second Life: going toward an open source virtual world? 

    Things are moving really fast three weeks after Linden went (partially) open source.
    Reverse-engineering client code users in the libsecondlife community have created the first (basic) open source Second Life server.

    The libsecondlife project is an effort directed at understanding how Second Life works from a technical perspective, and extending and integrating the metaverse with the rest of the web. This includes understanding how the official Second Life client operates and how it communicates with the Second Life simulator servers, as well as development of independent third party clients and tools. With all the media buzz on Second Life I am sure the project will attract more and more talented software engineers who will quickly (perhaps in only a few months) produce a fully operational open source version of the Second Life server code.

    The availability of the Second Life server code might allow service providers to deliver  independent Second Life services,  while current virtual land owners have expressed fears. It’s interesting how opening Second Life is fastly raising up questions about business models, not differently from what happen with open source business.

    Read the full article.

     
    • Savio Rodrigues 5:58 pm on February 1, 2007 Permalink

      It looks like opening up the client and the server software in the future as LL has expressed interest in doing, is a reaction to the challenge of scaling their business.

      The post from “SecondThoughts” indicates that LL will move away from making >70% of its revenue from selling land (which is really equivalent to selling server space).

      Just like vendors look towards open source to grow their customer base, LL is doing the same. As long as LL can capture revenue elsewhere (i.e. ads space in LL), they’re willing to trade off the revenue from selling land.

  • Roberto Galoppini 11:51 pm on January 30, 2007 Permalink | Reply  

    Linux Desktop:OSDL says it’s ready for prime time 

    The Linux promotion group’s desktop initiative reported that technical achievements in drivers, printing, graphics, wireless, sound and media, and BIOS compatibility, among other things, leave Linux poised for desktop growth this year.

    The report says:

    While some analysts reported a slowing of Linux penetration on the desktop in 2006, a number of significant milestones were reached that promise to continue to move the Linux desktop ahead in 2007.

    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