einen netten artikel hat petrley da geschrieben. und es ist wirklich schön, dass das jemand mal wieder gesagt hat. nichtsdestotrotz sollte man seine aussagen in die kategorie "mal wieder einen vorteil entdeckt" einordnen, wie der vergleich mit "setting up shop" von franz hecker zeigt:
peterley: "One IT decision-maker—someone somewhere in Fredonia, Iowa, I'm guessing—will have the epiphany that he has been asking the wrong question about how to protect his company's software investments. You know the question: "Will this vendor be around to support my installation 10 years from now?" That person will represent the tipping point of all IT decision-makers, and then the revolution will come."
hecker: "Much software has traditionally been distributed in source code form, and there are several commonly-accepted ways in which having source code for a product can directly increase the value of that p roduct for a customer by helping them solve any of a number of problems:
The customer can better protect their investment in a software product in the event that the software vendor goes out of business or decides to discontinue a product that is critical to the customer's operations. (Source code escrow provisions in contracts provide similar protection, but typically only for the case where a vendor goes out of business. Source code escrow also does not provide the additional indirect benefits discussed below.)
The customer can better understand how the software works in the event that the vendor's documentation is incomplete or confusing.
The customer can look for and correct potential security flaws in the product that might otherwise adversely impact the customer's operations.
The customer can fix bugs themselves if the vendor is unable or unwilling to do so.
The customer can subject the product to independent audit for proper Year 2000 support and other requirements and can correct any problems found.
The customer can port the software to new operating systems and/or hardware platforms not otherwise supported by the vendor.
The customer can use the source code to create customized versions of the original software product, extended and improved versions, or whole new applications, thus avoiding the need to write those applications "from scratch."
und das zweite argument von peterley: "My prediction is reliable for other reasons. For example, unlike Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer graduates, Linux experts have complete control over their own value to a company. Nobody can decertify a Linux expert, because nobody can claim exclusive ownership of the intellectual property they learn. Every reason I can cite to support this prediction points back to the same issue—having access to the source code." dazu hecker: "Once attracted to working with your source code, what would keep developers interested in doing so? The answers will vary depending on whether the developers are doing commercial or noncommercial development. Commercial developers will obviously be interested in some way to profit financially from their work. Working with your source code they will likely have a variety of possible approaches open to them:
They could specialize in customizing your software for particular customers or vertical markets.
They could provide fee-based product and/or developer support for customers.
They could potentially create and sell add-on products, either independently or as one of your channel partners. (Selling products themselves as opposed to support for such products assumes that the license you use permits proprietary add-ons; see below.)
They could license derivative works and related technology back to you (where the open-source license permits this).
They could be hired by you, either as contractors or as employees.
They could found companies that end up being acquired by your company or others.
du meintest, dass es sich hier um nicht viel neues handelt - wobei ich dir uneingeschränkt zustimme, aber: "Der Artikel zeigt Open Source Vorteile komplett aus der Managerperspektive, ohne jeder Übertreibung ... fast schon unheimlich wie selbstverständlich das da kommt", lässt ausser acht, dass peterley's aussagen zu kurz greifen, unreflektiert sind und eben das nicht zu erreichen vermögen, was ein solcher artikel erreichen sollte: die vorteile des oss-modells in seiner ganzen komplexität verständlich zu machen.
ceterum censeo
|
