Transcript NASCIO - 2004 Open Source Panel

IPMA Forum 2006
Open Source Discussion
Stuart McKee
National Technology Officer
Microsoft Corporation
May 23, 2006
Discussion points
• Software Licensing
• Software Business Model
• Software Development
Market Overview
IT Industry Trends
• Everyone agrees on one thing: the move to
x86
– Price/performance and flexibility driving change
– Intel and IA HW vendors realizing gains
•
•
•
•
Focus on security
Increasing pressures to do more with less
Broad web services movement
24x7 availability essential in a global
economy
Software Licensing
Software Licensing
There is a lot of confusion about the actual meaning of Open Source
software.
•
Several Models:
–
–
–
–
–
Commercial Software Development (CSD) Model
Open Source Licenses
Berkeley Software Distribution (BSD) License
GNU General Public License (GPL)
GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL)
Some Important Questions
You Should Have Answers To
• Have you had a legal review of the GPL (and the LGPL)?
• How does your use of GPL software affect your
intellectual property rights?
• Are you using any software governed by the Lesser
General Public License (LGPL) and, if so, how does that
license affect your rights and obligations?
• What is the difference between “mere aggregation of
modules” and “combining multiple modules into one
program”?
– How does this affect your Intellectual Property?
Microsoft Shared Source Initiative
• Microsoft is sharing source code globally
• 17 offerings, >1,500,000 developers, >60
countries
• 12 of 17 programs allow modifications and
distribution rights
• Shared Source Licenses
– Microsoft Permissive License (Ms-PL)
– Microsoft Community License (Ms-CL)
– Microsoft Reference License (Ms-RL)
microsoft.com/sharedsource
[email protected]
• >80 MS projects
• >600 non-MS projects
• >2,000,000 developers
•
•
•
•
Support Customers
Enable New Developers
Facilitate Teaching & Research
Create Opportunities for Partners
Business Model
Operating System Continuum
BSDs
Academic
Commercial Desktopfocused Distros
Integrated
Flexible
Non-Commercial Distros
Commercial Distros
Tradeoffs
Customizable
Arbitrary testing
Decentralization
Community or self support
High degree of variance
Rapid Release Cycle
Stability decrease
Reduced Complexity
Quality Assurance
Centralization
Commercial support
Predictability
Timed release
Stability increase
The Software Ecosystem
Commercial
Software
Industry
Intellectual
Commons
Customers
Governments
The Software Ecosystem
 The importance of the software ecosystem





Basic research
IP rights
Applied research
Product Development
Economic growth, tax revenue, and commercial
contributions
 Benefits of a flexible ecosystem
 Choice
 Market pricing
 Dialogue
Microsoft Ecosystem
Thriving Global Ecosystem
• Thousands of applications
• 750,000 Microsoft partners
• More than 450,000 MCSE
professionals
• More than 1.5M MCP certification
holders
• 6M+ developers
• 2200 user groups
• 400 community web sites
• Largest ISV Community worldwide
Greater choice at competitive prices for
services, applications, and support
Development Model
• Most significant OSS trend over past 4 years
– Corporate investment on every major OSS project
– Production quality development, testing and ecosystem growth
• Result: Greater choice, better technology, more services
Linux kernel contributions
Snapshot of Top
Contributors
(September 2004)
Redhat (4)
Few do most of work
•
% of changes to 2.6
100%
Of top 12,
10 are
commercial
developers
80%
Top 100 =
60% 84%
of work
40%
20%
0%
Top 12
= 44%
David Miller, Alan Cox, Dave
Jones, Alex Viro
IBM (1)
•
Greg Kroah-Hartman
Novell (1)
•
Jaroslav Kysela
SGI (1)
•
Christoph Hellwig
ARM Limited (1)
•
Russel King
OSDL (2)
•
Andrew Morton, Linus
Torvalds,
University of Iowa (1)
•
Kai Germaschewski
Samba (1)
OSS Testing
The Many Eyes Theory
Linus’ Law
Many open-source products are successful because countless
members of the periphery study the code, find faults, & suggest fixes
OSS developers tend to focus on high-profile work
– Coding vs. testing is more “fun” and receives more recognition in meritocracy
– Community is leaning on commercial organizations to contribute testing
•
•
Result - concentration of testing focus and increased influence from corporate sponsors
Security testing in particular is difficult for community – quality of tester is everything
Can Linus’ Law Keep Up With Linux?
– Kernel 2.6.3 to 2.6.4 line changes - 192,361 added, 244,830 changed, & 143,740
deleted. (Source: http://www.linuxhq.com/kernel/)
Limited core team resources and large code bases means that binary
testing is most common. Fixes depend on time, commitment and
testing of core teams.
Tomcat 4.0
GNOME
Mozilla
Core Work
Periphery Work
71.7%
81.1%
89.6%
28.3%
18.9%
10.4%
http://www.vuse.vanderbilt.edu/~srs/three.unexpected.ppt
SLOC
RedHat 7.1
Eclipse
OpenOffice
30,000,000
1,310,322
210,424
http://www.spindazzle.org/green/index.php?p=33
>390,000
Resellers
850,000
UU/mo
(3,000 posts)
Channel 9
Channel 9
250,000
UU/mo
Newsgroups
>350,000,000
Sample of
Communities @
>65,000
Customers
ISV Partners
>16,000 bloggers
7,000,000 RSS/mo
MSDN Blogs
177,000
UU/mo
GDN Japan
• Community reaches beyond source code
• Transparency and collaboration
• Compelling technology is primary driver of interest
500,000
UU/mo
MSCOM
Community Sites
>375,000
Services Partners
4,000,000
PV/mo
ASP.NET
450,000
UU/mo
GotDotNet
Loosely Coupled vs. Tightly Coupled
Commercial Development
Loosely Coupled (OSS)
•
Technical Model
–
–
–
–
–
–
•
R&D distributed: Maintainers,
committers, community pyramid
Volunteers, corporates
All with different motives, objectives,
ideas, with commonality in project
Need ‘benevolent dictatorship’
Results distributed to free riders and
participants
Project-specific transparency
Premium placed on standards for
everything – multiparty agreements
Business Model
–
–
–
–
Software is secondary/ commodity
Services are the core ‘product’
Original software motives,
accountability, people, difficult to
maintain
Customer insists on project
accountability via dependency on
services agreements
Tightly Coupled SW
•
Technical Model
–
–
–
–
–
–
•
Central R&D: Program managers,
Development teams, Testers,
Communities
One company management chain
Alignment determined by strength of
management
Results accrue to company
Managed transparency
Standards promote interoperability at
key interfaces
Business Model
–
–
–
–
Software is core product
Services are ancillary
Aligned or not by interests of
customers, shareholders, management
Customer insists on project
accountability via self service or
commodity services
What’s the point?
It’s About Choice
Each Choice Has Implications
Development
Choices
Language
Community
Source model
Platform
Distribution
Choices
Open source
Shareware
Freeware
Commercial
A combination of different
models
Licensing
Choices
BSD,
Shared Source
Licenses
Traditional commercial
licenses
GPL
Public domain
Business
Choices
Services
Packaged
software
Aggregate “distributions”
Appliances
Hardware
Ask the Questions, Do the Analysis
Community
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Balance The Benefits
Unique
Total Costs
Total Benefits
Product Development and Testing process
Community
Interoperability, compatibility
Total Value
Ecosystem
Equation
Licensing, Indemnification
Servicing and Patching
Support, Accountability
Roadmap for improvement, relevant innovation
Merits not Mandates; Value not Ideology
Procurement Policy
•
•
•
•
•
Technology leadership
Merits, not mandates
Government funded research
Platform-neutral standards
Intellectual property protections