Recent Updates Page 121 Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • Roberto Galoppini 9:15 pm on January 1, 2007 Permalink | Reply  

    Italian Open Source projects: WURFL 

    I heard many times people saying there are many Italian developers but no Italian OS projects.
    There are no Italian Red Hat, but there are no OS firms like Red Hat in the whole world!

    Despite the absence of an Italian OS firm publicly traded, there are few stories to tell.

    Few days ago I passed by a blog of an Italian developer and when I learn about his project I asked him to tell me more. Here it comes the WURFL project, a big repository of information that help to recognize browsers, devices and their capabilities about (almost) all known Wireless devices.

    To know more about the project and its business implications I posed with questions to the mantainer, Andrea Trasatti.

    How the project was conceived?

    WURFL was born in 2001. Since 1999 there was a mailing list collecting people talking about WAP and WML issues.
    As you might know every mobile phone had its own screen, any browser its own characteristics, and behaviors. Among us developers was quite straightforward to share information about mobile phones instead of buying all ones. That’s how WURFL started.

    So the software started, as pointed out by Raymond, by scratching a developer’s personal itch.
    The message from the WAP Forum to wait for implementations to converge didn’t sound good to them, and that’s why they began to develop a database of device capabilities, the WURFL.

    How did it grow?

    Despite many people were sending useful information, mantaining the project was a time consuming activity. At that stage I was employed by BWare Technologies, and I was working in a project for an Italian mobile operator. Since I was developing a multi-channel chat web and wap based, I was in the position to get information about a lot of mobiles. That’s how I became the mantainer of the configuration file.

    Luca Passani was there from the very beginning. He was employed by Openwave, and his company was interested to make WAP aware as many firms as possible.

    Many other developers joined the project as long as they were interested in the problem, then they leaved, while others were coming up to help the project.

    Everyone was using a different framework, but this was not a problem, since the format of choice was XML, and everyone might keep using his or her favourite tools. Many decided to share their libraries to access the data as well, and the project was growing.

    Then Luca Passani designed and implemented the WALL tag-library, enabling the delivery of applications to all devices (WAP 2, old WAP 1.X, XHTML and I-Mode). Using his library firms with almost no knowledge of WAP could wrote their own applications for WAP terminals quite easily. As maintainer and author of WURFL I have been invited as expert to join the W3C Mobile Web Initiative.

    How did the project affect your professional life as developer?

    At the very beginning I was employed by BWare Technologies, and WURFL took me one hour a week, there was no reason to raise the issue. Then increasing the number of new mobile devices I asked to allow me to spend some time mantaining WURFL, and it was easy to convince them, since we were taking advantage of it by some customers’ projects. Then I left Bware Technologies and WURFL became a medium to create business opportunities.
    While working by DADA, a leading European provider of mobile community and entertainment services, I used WURFL as a key tool and they allowed me to spend time to empower it.

    Nowadays I’m working with M:Metrics, their core business is about statistics.They’re really interested into WURFL, because it represents both a source of data and a marketing tool. Empowering content providers with a useful tool is a medium to help the Mobile market to grow.

    Indirect funding then, to call things with their name. It’s worth to notice that M:Metrics sounds like the most interested in aiding WURFL development, where the system integrator and the content provider might look like the best suite candidates.

    Who are the contributors?

    Sometimes single developers, hobbyists, medium to large system integrators or phone mobile producers.

    So the technological club, started from single developers, today encompass every kind of contributor. In terms of adoption today WURFL is likely more popular than pure UAProf solutions.

    The idea of sharing a “standard” was really strong in their mind, they couldn’t wait for implementations to converge “naturally”. And they got big attention, as seen they were invited to join a W3C initiative, and they spoke clear and loud.

    What about the coordination of production?

    Our organization is simple. Luca Passani takes care of Java libraries and WALL, I take care of the PHP library. Then I manage all contributions, while he is busy with our web.
    Both of us spend time reading the mailing-list wmlprogramming, he moderates it also.

    We receive contributions from other developers in other languages, like ruby, perl, or .NET. Data are all free, while libraries are licensed with MPL, GPL or BSD.
    The project is guested by Sourceforge, and source code is accessible via CVS.
    Very few contributors have write privileges for their own modules.

    We’re very happy and proud of our results, and I believe many firms use it not only because it’s gratis, but because of its open nature, and our mission is to keep it so.

    Thank you Andrea, I wish you happy hacking, and please keep WURFL cool!

     

    • Andrea Trasatti 10:35 am on January 2, 2007 Permalink

      Thank you Roberto for the article, it was a pleasure to have this interview with you and chatting about open-source and business opportunities.

      I think WURFL has a bright future ahead. Luca and I are working daily to channel the energies of the community to give more fire-power to WURFL.

      The idea of open-source in Italy is often to have something for free and not even say “Thank you” to the original developers. I have taken a lot from the open-source world and it feels good to give something back. It is hard to find sponsors in Italy. DADA was an exception and it was good. M:Metrics is a US company and things are different again.
      We should try to import the best from the foreign countries and not just hamburgers. 🙂

    • Roberto Galoppini 1:05 pm on January 2, 2007 Permalink

      Andrea would you explain what do you mean by “M:Metrics is a US company and things are different again”, please?

    • Andrea Trasatti 2:03 pm on January 2, 2007 Permalink

      I have worked for Italian companies for more than 10 years now and most of the times we are talking about small companies that have grown from nothing to whatever they are today. This means that over the years the managers have saved the money they earned and spent it in new projects and development.

      What I think is crazy is that in Italy there is very little investment (if nothing) in the research and development. Companies always invest internally in projects they feel safe will bring some revenue in the very near future. There is very little pure research.
      Investments in new technologies in Italy is very little. Rarely happens that a company spends money on the learning for its employees.
      A demonstration of this is the number of Italian companies participating in research activities such as the W3C. The W3C counts 3-4 entities from Italy, one is the CNR and another is Telecom Italia Lab.
      Where are all the other companies?

      This is what makes me think that open-source can hardly find investments in Italy. Research and open-source today go side-by-side, in my opinion. A lot of research is done in open-source and a lot of innovation came from the open-source, look at PHP or JBoss.
      Companies in countries like England, Ireland and France are spending much more money and time in research and development and this will bring them to even more advantage in the future.

      I think that the post from Fabrizio Capobianco describes some of these ideas too, in the “The Funambol model: US capital and Italian heart ” paragraph from BAIA invited post on the Funambol model. He is Italian, all the development is done in Pavia, but they had to go to the Silicon Valley to find some money to start working.

    • Roberto Galoppini 6:48 pm on January 2, 2007 Permalink

      It’s worth to notice that Italian VCs tend to invest only on sure bets. After all Italian Banks get money because medium to large companies pay 120 days after, so companies have to borrow money from them, an easy game to play.

      Then you’re right, Italian companies do not participate to standardization bodies, and I believe there are a number of reasons, ranging from cultural aspects to linguistic ones.

      About R&D expenditures I know that in other countries there are fiscal deductions for firms who invest in R$D.
      This might help, I guess.

      My personal experience in Italy says that if you have a good project you might help from public institutions, like the Financial Investment Agency of the Regione Lazio (FILAS), who helped me to create a network between a roman university and my company.

      I’m looking forward to interview Fabrizio Capobianco,stay tuned!

    • Andrea Trasatti 6:45 pm on January 4, 2007 Permalink

      I don’t live in Lazio so I don’t know them. According to the site they are focused on the Lazio-region only.

      I have very little experience with public funding, but of course I know that in some cases they deliver high funds if we compare it to the economics of small companies and start-ups.

      From your posts it seems like you have had a positive experience. I don’t have any, actually. What would you advise?

      What did you get funding for?

      What was the outcome?

      How did you report on the results? Were the funds “a fondo perso” or was it a loan with a tiny rate?

    • Roberto Galoppini 7:33 pm on January 4, 2007 Permalink

      I believe almost every Italian region guest public institutions similar to FILAS, you better check it out through your local business innovation center. – there are 160 BICs in 21 countries sharing the goal of supporting SMEs development –

      My experience: it took me six months to get the project – create a commercial open source product starting from a toolkit made by academic researchers – approved and funded.

      I personally interviewed applicants along with FILAS and the professor involved with the project, and and I got three researchers paid for one year.
      Besides that they sponsored a marketing research, and at the end of the day we did a very good deal spending some efforts to work on the business model in order to get it approved.

      If you have a business idea, give it a try!

  • Roberto Galoppini 6:13 pm on December 31, 2006 Permalink | Reply  

    Licensing: MySQL decided to stay with GPLv2 

    MySQL on the 22th of December refined its licensing scheme from GPLv2 or later to GPLv2 only.

    In 2000 when MySQL AB licensed its software under the GPL, the choice was made because

    the GPL was a license followed and respected by everyone. We have kept to it, because the GPL is the most palatable license, and poses the least friction for our user base.

    ..MySQL has been part of the GPLv3 Committee B advising FSF since the GPLv3 draft was announced in January 2006. For GPLv3, we have seen fantastic improvements and hope for GPLv3 to spread. Even though my activity level as co-chair for Committee B was by far higher in the spring than what it has been in the past few months,

    Despite MySQL AB will keep working with the FSF for GPLv3, as they did from January 2006, they decided that

    until we get clear and strong indications for the general acceptance of GPLv3 over GPLv2, we feel comfortable with a specific GPLv2 reference in our license.

    Has FSF a problem to obtain broad acceptance of GPLv3?

     

  • Roberto Galoppini 1:24 pm on December 31, 2006 Permalink | Reply  

    Telcos enjoy Open Source 

    In the last years we have been seeing open source adoption getting popular by telcos.
    In my entrepreneurial experience telco operators use open source infrastructures to achieve a competitive advantage through customization; viable OS projects in this respect are freeRADIUS, OpenLDAP and Squid, just to name a few.

    Beyond my experiences I noticed MySQL is doing very well in the telco arena, and the SCOPE alliance, founded by Alcatel, Ericsson, Motorola, NEC, Nokia and Siemens to

    enable and promote the availability of open carrier grade base platforms based on COTS hw/sw and FLOSS building blocks

    has almost one year now.

    Also Telecom Italia has recently revealed its strategical approach to open source, showing an interest in developing enabling ecosystems based on OS community.

    There are even new generation companies, like Tellme , build almost completely on open source, read the full story.

     

  • Roberto Galoppini 12:47 pm on December 30, 2006 Permalink | Reply  

    Commercial Open Source Software 

    I meet a lot of people using the term “commercial software” as the opposite of open source or free software, and that’s why I titled my blog Commercial Open Source Software. I was amazed today when I happened to read Wheeler’s essay Commercial is not the opposite of Free-Libre / Open Source Software.
    David A. Wheeler, who has written a number of articles as the famous “Why OSS/FS? Look at the Numbers!” paper or the list of the most important software innovations, about himself and his approach to open source said:

    I’m not a Linux advocate. I’m an advocate for considering the use of open source software / free software (OSS/FS). As I clearly state in my “Why OSS/FS? Look at the Numbers!” paper, I think it’s a serious problem that many people fail to even consider OSS/FS products.

    I always recommended his paper to have a in depth look into the TCO thing, and from now on I will suggest people getting wrong thinking that FLOSS and commercial software are opposites to read his last work.

    I found interesting his walk through the U.S. regulation to show that FLOSS programs are commercial items for purposes of the U.S. government, and I hope it applies to other countries.

    I liked very much his conclusion, a good advice for CIO busy choosing good consultants:

    A speaker who uses the term “commercial” as an antonym for FLOSS is probably someone who doesn’t understand FLOSS yet. And someone doesn’t understand the fundamentals of how software is governed will be constantly confused about what controls every device on the planet. Be wary of people who have such a basic lack of understanding; they are far less likely to give good software advice or to make good software-related decisions.

    Thanks David for your job!

     

  • Roberto Galoppini 11:58 am on December 29, 2006 Permalink | Reply  

    Open Source Franchising (Matt Asay) 

    I’m glad Matt Asay found time to post about my franchising idea. The ball is rolling.

    Matt reporting numbers I cited from IDC and Forrester studies said:

    IDC found that 38% of enterprises hire outside consultants to do their migration services and 39% hire outside consultants to do implementation services. For these same services, 59% and 66%, respectively, do the work themselves, internally.

    This means that either a) this sort of work is best/cheapest done internally or b) no one has created a viable model to do these basic services better/cheaper/faster.

    I believe both a) and b) apply, and it makes perfect sense to me because:

    • Medium to Large companies use OS to take back control, and to save money;
      .
    • SMEs use OS just to save money, and they keep outsourcing IT services..

    Large companies demand OS add-value services, and they don’t want to cope with the myriads of small to nano firms delivering OS-based solutions. Today they have no many options, since medium to large System Integrator are not ready yet to deliver those services, at least in Europe.

    SMEs instead need more basic service than anything else, and they’re the perfect target.
    No one has created yet a viable model to do these basic services better/cheaper/faster, as Matt said, and setting Service Level Agreement (SLA) could greatly help.

    SLA in my vision are a must, and the reason is simple: customers don’t know much about open source, but that “it costs nothing”. And unfortunately the perceived value of a good/service is somehow related to its price. On the other hand perceptual benchmarking is done by customers comparing known reference goods/services, and here I see an opportunity.

    What if those basics services would be delivered on time, on budget and respecting pre-established criteria? Entepreneurs and professionists (lawyers, technical studies, etc) are driven by the urgence of their business, they want clear and prompt answers, but local small firms don’t follow any checklist, don’t offer any real SLA, don’t match their needs.

    The franchisor may offer a solid experience in organizing, training franchisees making them able to cope with customers expectations, besides all other usual services. I believe training is the key.

    IT basic services today are supplied by artisans, and perceived as a sort of “digital handicraft”. What we need is moving from artisanship to an industrial age of IT services.
    But Industrialising IT requires changes on the part of providers of IT services, and of customers.

    Another interesting suggestion from Matt:

    For this reason I think Novell, with its experience with its YES! certification program, might be in the pole position to deliver a robust franchising program. It, too, has a strong open source desktop offering (better than Sun’s, in my opinion), Linux, etc. And since a big swath of enterprises (44%, according to data cited by Roberto) use Linux for web/email services, as well as file/print, where Novell has good experience, it might be a good product fit, too.

    Novell the mixed-source company might well be a candidate. I found two reason to say Sun is the perfect candidate, and I’m curious to know your opinion on that:

    • Sun is (mostly) an hardware vendor, being a franchisor might help them to sell hardware;
      .
    • Sun is giving away almost all its software, and it has no clear OS strategy yet..

    The first reason is quite simple, and it’s a very good one to spend time and effort in developing a franchising model. The second doesn’t deserve any explanations, I guess.

    IBM is my the second best.

    Frank Hecker, executive director of the Mozilla Foundation, author of the classical Setting up a shop – The business of Open-Source Software, on Matt Asay blog argued that:

    I’m also not an expert in ISV channel programs, but these two aspects seem a major departure from traditional arrangements. I have to wonder how successful a vendor like Sun or Novell with an existing channel program would be in moving their channel partners to such a model.

    He is right, overlapping between the franchising model and the channel program is an issue.
    Open Source Franchising demand an effort to clearly identify differences between those channels, and this it’s definitely much easier for Sun than for Novell (because of different channel programs).

    The ideal franchisee is a startup company, young people able and willing to invest time and money, smart and rigorous hacker.

     

    • Frank Hecker 9:07 pm on December 30, 2006 Permalink

      “The ideal franchisee is a startup company…” Do you mean that a startup company would be the best candidate to build a business based on franchising to others, or that startups would be good candidates for companies like Sun or Novell to recruit as franchisees?

      Because of potential conflicts with existing channel programs, I think a startup company would be best positioned to use a franchising model to grow its business, as opposed to creating a conventional channel program: As a new company a startup would not have any problems with channel conflicts.

    • Roberto Galoppini 9:49 pm on December 30, 2006 Permalink

      I believe startups would be good candidates for companies like Sun (IBM, Novell, etc) as franchisees. Startups must bear the burdens of liabilities of newness, of smallness and of fundamental uncertainty.
      Both newness and smallness might be well mitigated by a (good) franchising program, that’s why a startup might be interested.
      But a startup is viable from the franchisor perspective also, since it’s not lost in daily activities and can manage to spend time and effort to train its human resources.

      I follow your line of thought when you say it would be easier for a startup to run a franchising model (no channel conflicts), but a well established brand might make the difference.

      By the way it’s worth notice that multinationals are already having troubles with channel programs, but that’s another story.

  • Roberto Galoppini 6:03 pm on December 28, 2006 Permalink | Reply  

    Software Patent: “No Lobbyist As Such” 

    Over the last four years I have been actively involved with the so called war over software patent, and I had a chance to know many entepreneurs, politicians and lobbyists involved with.

    No one like Florian Mueller was able to keep a strategic vision all the time, and despite he was criticized by both parties, he was conceded the category award “Campaigner of the Year” by the European Voice, and many other awards.

    Evil lobbyist
    Evil lobbyist by mimax

    Unfortunately I couldn’t manage to help him to get his book translated in Italian, but I can recommend it as the most interesting and entertaining book you can read on the topic. Besides software patentability it’s a book about European legislative processes, about lobbyism and, somehow, about Democracy.

    Below some comments about the book from known voices.

    Florian’s book vividly conveys the feeling of what we experienced. A must-read for all who are concerned about software patents, and for those who want to know how things work in EU politics.
    Benjamin Henrion, FFII Belgium

    The fascinating story of how a group of activists made EU history and saved our industry from a potential flood of lawsuits. When reading this you feel like you’re standing in a parliament and talking directly to the politicians who made the decisions.
    Kaj Arnö, VP Community Relations, MySQL AB

    Technorati Tags: software patent, Florian Mueller, no lobbyist as such

     

  • Roberto Galoppini 2:32 pm on December 28, 2006 Permalink | Reply  

    Business development: surveys and considerations 

    Few months ago I took part in a survey on FLOSS firms conducted by CALIBRE researchers.

    CALIBRE researchers have derived a set of expectations for what they call open-sourcing,

    whereby companies seek to grow a community of open source developers around what has typically (but not always) been a proprietary product previously

    and have asked feedbacks to SMBs belonging to associations, consortia and other organizations bringing firms under a common umbrella.

    As participant I received summary results , and I made some considerations based on my personal experience as founder of the first Italian Consortium of FLOSS firms.

    Network Membership.
    I found interesting opinions expressed about the following statements:

    • Candidate companies must have skills/expertise that are beneficial to the existing members
      .
    • To become members of the network, candidate companies must be known to, or have a prior relationship with, existing members.

    To be in the know and having skills and expertise beneficial to existing members were not considered mandatory to get in the network by a large percentage. In my personal experience be known was a highly desirable characteristic: it took me months gathering firms to start up the consortium just because we all pretend to choose each other.

    Member reputation.
    About the following statements:

    • Our company considers the competence and skills of other member companies before doing business with them
      .
    • It is important that our company is seen by other members as being professionally competent
      .
    • It is important that our company fulfills our obligations to other members to maintain our reputation in the network.

    More than 90% of firms said competence is a critical success factor, either to choose partners or to be seen as competent and trustable. I understand and share these results, and I had only positive cooperation experiences within the network.

    Shared Beliefs and Values.
    People were asked to comment the following statements about what network members share:

    • a common software development philosophy
      .
    • accepted ways of doing business
      .
    • a sense of common destiny

    Firms interviewed didn’t find a common ground on those topics. Despite OS firms base their business on commons-based peer-production, there was no high demand for sharing a common software development philosophy.
    The way others do business wasn’t an issue either. It makes perfect sense to me, since we’re speaking about loosely coupled organizations don’t set strict constraints.
    For just the same reason members don’t feel they’re sharing a sense of common destiny.

    Integrating Members’ activities.
    About the following statements:

    • Information on the skills and abilities of other network members is readily available;
      .
    • The network has transparent routines for coordinating work between member companies;
      .
    • The network enables seamless hand-off of tasks between partners.

    To my big surprise less than half participants to the survey reported availability of members’ skills, since it was one of our first goal when we set up the consortium.

    Almost 40% percent of interviewed firms said the network has transparent routines for coordinating work, and a quarter of them declared that the network enables seamless hand-off.
    I’m honestly amazed by these answers, in my experience coordinating activities among members was quite heavy, and troublesome when the goal was internally funded. I’m afraid loosely coupled organizations can’t pretend to set high standards when it comes to inter-firms cooperation, I would be interested to know how others coped with this issue.

    Network effectiveness.
    People about the business side commented the following statements:

    • Our company has benefited from the skills/expertise of other member companies
      .
    • Our company has benefited through the sharing of customer contacts with other network members
      .
    • The network has enabled our company to compete for contracts that we couldn’t compete for on our own.

    Almost 60% of interviewed members said they took advantage of others skills/expertise, a percentage higher than that one about availability of members’ skills, an apparent contradiction.
    Only 30% of members declared to have benefit through the sharing of customers, but more than 40% said they could compete for contracts being part of the network.

    Nothing really new under the sun, but I believe networks of FLOSS firms will have a greater impact on commercial open source, and I’m looking forward to read and comment CALIBRE findings, as soon as available.

     

  • Roberto Galoppini 1:43 pm on December 27, 2006 Permalink | Reply  

    Open Letter to Simon Phipps, Chief Open Source Officer at Sun Microsystems 

    Dear Simon,

    much has been said about the importance of the establishment of a well organized Open Source Community to benefit the future of OpenOffice.org, and we do agree upon this goal.

    As Italian Native-Lang Project we believe that:

    • an open source project is about sequential innovation, it’s about contributing software, documents and tools to something as a community for the benefit of others;
      .
    • open source projects are open to the participation of anybody who can contribute value and is willing to work with the community, and volunteering demands big respect.
      .

    We have tried for seven months to get an answer about the hypothetic mismatch between OpenOffice.org license and the Italian dictionary and thesaurus released by Italian volunteers.
    The former is under LGPL, where textual resources are released under the GNU GPL license.

    We’re spending time and efforts from months to include such useful and powerful resources, while we could invest our energies in more important issues, like promoting ODF and OpenOffice.org along institutions, supporting users and developing and including more extensions.

    Should the Italian Native-Lang Project mantain a fork to distribute users a full version of OpenOffice.org, along with those textual resource?
    We do really hope not, and we’re looking forward to get your help with the legal review of licenses.

    The Italian Native-Lang Project team

     

    • Mirco 12:42 am on January 2, 2007 Permalink

      I’ve worked on Thesaurus please let it be uasble. Thanks a lot.

    • Simon Phipps 5:13 pm on February 3, 2007 Permalink

      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.

  • Roberto Galoppini 2:31 pm on December 24, 2006 Permalink | Reply  

    Open Source: year in review, opinions 

    2006 was a great year for Open Source, no doubt.

    For eweek Open Source got big-time, because of:

    • Oracle announcement of offering support for Red Hat Enterprise Linux to address lack of “true enterprise support for Linux”, as Ellison himself said.
      .
    • Microsoft and Novell announcement of collaboration agreements, including patent protection.The two companies agreed to disagree on that point, lacking of good communication.
      .
    • Sun Microsystems finally decided to release Java.
      .

    CNET put GPLv3 debate on top of its list, but JBoss acquisition by Red Hat, Microsoft sponsorship of an open-source project to develop a converter between Open Office XML and OpenDocument file formats and French parliament dumpling Windows for Linux were on the list too.
     Last but not least I’d recommend Matt Asay reflections on 2006, detailed and not too personal.

     

  • Roberto Galoppini 7:26 pm on December 23, 2006 Permalink | Reply  

    OpenSolaris: Sun gets it certified and spread 

    Open Solaris 10 has received the Common Criteria at Evaluation Assurance Level 4+ (EAL 4+).

    What does it mean? Bill Vass, President and Chief Operating Officer of Sun Microsystems, wrote:

    At Sun, we continue to lead with Certified Open Source Operating Systems that will run on X86/X64 or SPARC hardware from any vendor, at a lower support cost than RedHat.

    The idea than seems to be making Open Solaris a viable alternative to the RH flavour of Linux.

    Ambitious. Projects like Belenix might help, but there is no easy way to such goal.
    Jonathan Schwartz about Open Solaris spread reported an effective picture showing all machines that connect back to Sun’s free update service.

    Schwartz said that:

    it doesn’t account for all Solaris 10 downloads, but shows the value of leveraging the internet to meet customers (new and old).

    But as I already wrote turning users into real customers is not trivial.

    My guess? Sun adopting a franchising business model, soon.

     

    • osgeek 8:04 pm on December 23, 2006 Permalink

      yeah, it is cool. Solaris 10 keeps getting better each passing day!
      osgeek

    • jamey 9:59 pm on December 23, 2006 Permalink

      More info on the Solaris Registrations Map can be found here.

← Older posts

Newer posts →

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