Open source forcing shift in software buying
Jennifer Mears and Ann Bednarz
Network World (US online)
20/02/2006 08:16:17
Computerworld
http://www.computerworld.com.au/index.php/id;655995576;fp;16;fpid;0
Commercial software giants such as Oracle and IBM are moving deeper
into the
open source community by snapping up the startups built to provide
services
around the free software, a trend that means corporate buyers should
think
carefully about future projects before making deployment decisions,
experts
say.
Though arguably in its early stages, the trend is accelerating.
Recently Oracle
announced it would buy open source database vendor Sleepycat Software,
and
rumors continue to swirl about its interest in JBoss, one of the
leading open
source application server firms.
Last year IBM bought open source infrastructure company Gluecode
Software, and
Check Point Software is finalizing its purchase of Snort-creator
Sourcefire,
announced last fall. At the same time, commercial vendors are
beginning to
offer versions of their proprietary products for free and are
contributing
proprietary code into the open source community, lending credence to
the idea
of making money from services and support around community-developed
software.
Still, there are concerns as commercial vendors ingest the companies
that were
the first to make this business model work. At risk is the loss of
user access
to key application development personnel -- a hallmark of open source
projects
-- and the potential departure of critical project stewards.
"I believe what will really determine the success or failure of
commercial
firms purchasing open source vendors is the extent to which they can
keep the
key developers," says Barry Strasnick, CIO at CitiStreet, a benefits
management
company based in Mass. "One of the main reasons that CitiStreet likes
to deal
with vendors such as JBoss is that our senior technical staff can deal
with
their technical staff, instead of having to deal with useless layers in
between," he sys. "We don't buy software because of fancy brochures or
well-dressed sales staff. We buy software to gain benefit from great
programmers."
Another concern with commercial vendors acquiring open source
companies is the
possibility that the software could be applied to enhance proprietary
products.
"The question that customers need to pay attention to is what is going
to
happen to the code that was open source," says Bob Igou, a research
director at
Gartner. "Does it remain open source? Is the acquiring company going
to make
sure it's even better tested and quality assured and provide services
around
it? Or are they worst case going to cannibalize it and integrate it
into
something else they're doing and in a sense the open source product
goes away?"
It remains to be seen how these acquiring vendors will treat their new
open
source assets. Users are watching with caution.
"I think it's a bit too early to know whether [this trend] will be
beneficial,"
says Corey Ostman, director of new technology initiatives at
PriceGrabber.com
in Culver City, Calif. "One of the biggest challenges would be if these
commercial companies morph the [open source] products in such a way
that they
no longer offer leading-edge technologies."
But even if that did happen, Ostman says he is convinced that the open
source
community likely would develop alternatives to fill the gap.
"The open source marketplace has always been competitive and dynamic,"
he says.
It's that kind of innovation, coupled with growing corporate interest,
that is
driving commercial vendors to take a closer look at their open source
counterparts.
"The jig is up for commercial vendors," says Richard Monson-Haefel, a
senior
analyst at Burton Group. "They're discovering that in certain cases
open source
software is basically pulling the rug out from under them by
commoditizing the
market."
"They've tried to resist ... originally by spreading fear, uncertainty
and
doubt and then by challenging the quality of the software. But now
they're
buying the companies that are sponsoring the [open source] work," he
says.
Indeed, Gartner predicts that by 2010, software vendors that don't
incorporate
open-source software into their products risk becoming uncompetitive
because of
the cost associated with relying on in-house engineering resources.
Part of the allure for commercial vendors is the opportunity to
attract more
developers with low-cost, open products, with the hope of driving
business
upstream into more robust - and expensive - offerings for broader
production
deployments.
"What the vendors are trying to do here is they're trying to find a
foothold in
a market that is changing rapidly and substantially," says
Monson-Haefel. "And
they're also trying to find ways in which to guide people who are
adopting open
source to their commercial offerings as they look for more robust and
sophisticated platforms."
For that reason, some industry watchers say open source products are
in good
hands when acquired by responsible commercial software makers.
"It's just not in their interest to destroy the community or stifle
the ongoing
development," says Tony Wasserman, executive director of the Center
for Open
Source Investigation at Carnegie Mellon University's west-coast campus
in
Moffett Field, Calif.
Of course, as in any vendor acquisition, some purchasers will be better
shepherds than others, Wasserman says. "Acquisitions tend to work or
not work -
in both the commercial and open source world - based on what the
acquirer
does," he says.
Joel Snyder, senior partner at consulting firm Opus One and a Network
World Lab
Alliance member, sees lots of potential in open source vendor
acquisitions.
"Companies should be happy when they see a big name behind an open
source
project, because it generally means more and better support, rather
than less,"
he says.
To some extent, the trend is inevitable. "Really solid enterprise
software
always seems to need some commercial backing," Snyder says. Some of
the most
significant open source projects -- Linux, BIND, MySQL and Sendmail --
are
where they are largely because of corporate dollars being poured into
them, he
says.
After all, altruism alone isn't going to sustain software developers
who have
to make a living, Snyder says. "The reality is that the two --
commercial and
open source -- actually thrive better together than they do
separately," Snyder
says.
Bob Hecht is aware of the potential for open source players to get
purchased,
but that doesn't deter him from depending on open source software for
mission-critical systems at his company, Informa.
"One of the biggest risks that companies have in purchasing open source
software is success," says Hecht, who is vice president of content
strategies
at London-based firm that produces publications, events and data
services
worldwide. "Success means that somebody is going to end up offering
somebody a
lot of money to buy it out."
Informa runs a full Linux stack for many of its front-end
applications, and it
has embedded Apache's Lucene search engine in dozens of applications,
says
Hecht. It has tinkered with Liferay's portal, and it's getting ready
to go live
with its first deployment of Alfresco Software's open source
enterprise content
management software.
In addition, Informa is preparing to deploy a multimillion-dollar
content
delivery platform that uses a MySQL repository, Hecht says.
"I'm comfortable in saying that if we build something on an open source
platform and it gets bought, it's ours anyway," he says. "The
implication is
for future development, but open source has a way of living. It finds
a way."
To prepare for a scenario where development or support for an
open-source
application is cut off, Hecht makes sure Informa's internal
development staff
is skilled with the product. "We look at it as a reason to get as
familiar and
capable with this platform as we possibly can so that we essentially
secure our
future that way. If we do, then we immunize ourselves from potential
problems
like that," he says.
Regardless, the commercial interest in open source should send a
message to IT
buyers that open source is here to stay.
"If you've had doubts that open source is mainstream today, the amount
of money
being thrown around here should make you believe this is not just a
flash in
the pan," says Michael Goulde, a senior analyst at Forrester Research.
"It
should be something you're considering, if you're not already."