Planet JM

Blog

  • TechRepublic: Open Source and Corporate Funding

    I have more to say about this. See the original article on TechRepublic.

    Basic argument goes like this, “individual developers working in their mom’s basement no longer drive open source development! Now it’s all about the corporate $$$$.” My initial thought is “duh”. I’ve always felt that the narrative about a decentralized army creating amazing software that undermined large vendors was entirely wrong. So it’s not that open source is “increasingly” about corporate funding – it was *always* about corporate funding. And as I’ve mentioned elsewhere, open source is not free software. Free software, also known as software freedom, has been about the rights of individual developers and users against the IP cabal of the TIC (techno industrial complex). Open source was about, “yeah, that’s great – but how can I profit from that?”

    So congrats to TechRepublic for being about 15 years behind. I guess?

  • EnterpriseIT Writeup on LA Symposium

    EnterpriseIT Writeup on LA Symposium

    If you’ve been watching this space, you know we’ve been gearing up for our LA symposium on September 14, co-located with the Linux Foundation’s Open Source Summit. Swapnil Bhartiya walks through the different talks and why you should go – as well as a good bit from me about OSEN and the event:

    “The secret of 21st century innovation is that much of it doesn’t happen inside software vendors anymore, rather the most innovative companies have learned how to make use of all the innovation that happens outside their office walls and often beyond their control.

    So how does one take advantage of the open source innovation happening outside of your purview? And learn how to build products and business in this new collaborative model? That’s why you should attend – RSVP now ($149.99).

  • Is Open Source More Risky?

    Is Open Source More Risky?

    There’s been a long-running debate over open source and security, and it goes something like this:

    Pro: Open source is awesome! Given enough eyes, all bugs are shallow. This is why open source software is inherently more secure.

    Con: Hackers can see the code! They’ll look at the source code and find ways to exploit it. This is why open source software is inherently more insecure.

    And on and on… ad nauseum. There are a variety of studies that each side can finger to help state their case. The problem as I see it, is that we’re not even talking about the same thing. If someone says open source software is more or less secure, what are they actually talking about? Do they mean software you download from the web and push into production? Or do they mean vendor-supported solutions? Unless we can agree on that, then any further discussion is pointless.

    Open Source Products

    So let’s shift the conversation to an apples vs. apples comparison so that we’re discussing the same things. According to a survey by Black Duck, upwards of 96% of commercial software solutions use open source software to some extent. This means virtually *all* new software solutions use open source software. So, when someone argues whether open source is more or less secure, the question to ask is, “more or less secure than *what*?” Because as we can see, the number of software solutions that *don’t* use open source software is rapidly dwindling.

    To save everyone’s breath, let’s change the dynamics of this conversation. Let’s compare “raw” upstream open source code vs. supported software solutions backed by a vendor. As I’ve mentioned before, you can do the former, but it helps if you’re Amazon, Google or Facebook and have an army of engineers and product managers to manage risk. Since most of us aren’t Amazon, Google or Facebook, we usually use a vendor. There are, of course, many grey areas in-between. If you choose to download “raw” code and deploy in production, there are naturally many best practices you should adopt to ensure reliability, including developing contingency plans for when it all goes pear-shaped. Most people choose some hybrid approach, where core, business-critical technologies come with vendor backing, and everything else is on a case-by-case basis.

    So, can we please stop talking about “open source vs. proprietary”? We should agree that this phrasing is inherently anachronistic. Instead, let’s talk about “managed” vs. “unmanaged” solutions and have a sane, productive discussion that can actually lead us forward.

  • Transform Your Business with Open Source Entrepreneurship

    Transform Your Business with Open Source Entrepreneurship

    This is a webinar I did for the Linux Foundation earlier this month. If you missed it, you can catch it on demand!

     

  • DevOps is not enough

    Or: My source code is your platform, and vice-versa.

    https://twitter.com/i/moments/897859467529912321

    https://twitter.com/johnmark/status/897837253946466304

  • Linux.com: 4 Quadrants of Open Source Entrepreneurship

    Linux.com: 4 Quadrants of Open Source Entrepreneurship

    In light of my Linux Foundation webinar, Building a Business on Open Source, (today, August 1, at 10am PDT/1pm EDT) as well as upcoming meetups and the OSEN Symposium co-located with Open Source Summit, I wrote a piece all about the 4 areas that define open source entrepreneurship: Automation, Collaboration, Community and Governance.

    Lots of companies, even large proprietary ones, had started to use open source software in their products and services, but there was very little in the way of sharing that came from them. Even so, many of them did a poor job of participating in the upstream communities that created the software they used. Shouldn’t these companies get the full benefit of open source participation? I also came across a few startups who wanted to participate in open source communities but were struggling with how to find the best approach for open source participation while creating great products that would fund their business. Most of them felt that these were separate processes with different aims, but I thought they were really part of the same thing. As I continued down this fact-finding path, I felt strongly that there needed to be more resources to help businesses get the most out of their open source forays.

    Read the full article at Linux.com.

  • OSEN Symposium Program Revealed

    OSEN Symposium Program Revealed

    We’re happy to announce that we have set the preliminary agenda for the OSEN Symposium, co-located with the Linux Foundation’s Open Source Summit in Los Angeles on September 14.

    We have an incredible lineup!

    9am: The Principles of Open Source Entrepreneurship

    John Mark Walker, Creator of OSEN

    10am: How to successfully enter the FOSS emerging market

    VM Brasseur, Technical Business and Open Source Strategy Consultant

    11am Innovating in the open: Lessons from a 3 time founder of successful open source based businesses

    Evan Powell, CEO, Cloudbyte

    1pm There is no Open Source Business Model

    Stephen Walli, Open Source and Tech Strategy Consultant

    2pm Effective Business Leadership with Open Source Supply Chain Management

    Shane Coughlan, OpenChain Project Leader

    3pm The World Bank GeoNode Study: 200% ROI on Open Source Community Participation

    James Vasile, Partner at Open Tech Strategies

    Register today!

  • Kite Demonstrates Continuing Toxicity of Silicon Valley

    One of the most frustrating parts of being in open source circles is battling the conventional wisdom in the Valley that open source is just another way to do marketing. It’s complicated by the fact that being a strong open source participant can greatly aid marketing efforts, so it’s not as if marketing activities are completely unrelated to open source processes. But then something happens that so aptly demonstrates what we mean when we say that Silicon Valley has largely been a poisonous partner for open source efforts. Which brings me to this week’s brouhaha around a silly valley startup looking to “Make money fast!” by glomming onto the success of open source projects.

    To quote from the article:

    After being hired by Kite, @abe33 made an update to Minimap. The update was titled “Implement Kite promotion,” and it appeared to look at a user’s code and insert links to related pages on Kite’s website. Kite called this a useful feature. Programmers said it was not useful and was therefore just an ad for an unrelated service, something many programmers would consider a violation of the open-source spirit.

    It’s the “stealing underpants” business model all over again.

    1. Get users and “move the needle”
    2. ?
    3. Profit!

    Step 1 above is why we actually have valley poseurs who unironically refer to themselves as “growth hackers.” Only in the valley.

    The really sad part of this is that the methodology outlined above is terrible, not just because it’s unethical, but because it’s counterproductive to what Kite wants to accomplish. As I’ve mentioned countless times before, a project is not a product, and trying to turn it into one kills the project. The best way to make money on open source is to, big surprise, make a great product that incorporates it in a way that adds value to the customer. In this example, this means taking projects like minimap and autocomplete-python, producing commercial versions of them, and make them part of an existing product or offer them up as separate downloads – from the company site or part of a commercial distribution.

    The worst part of all this is there are still investors and business folks who think that doing is Kite did is the only way to make money from an open source project. It’s not. It’s a terrible maneuver from both an ethics as well as product development standpoint. It’s once again conflating open source with marketing, which is one of the reasons I started this site – it’s an unforced error and should be part of any “open source product 101” curriculum.

  • Linux Foundation Webinar: Open Source Entrepreneurship Howto

    Linux Foundation Webinar: Open Source Entrepreneurship Howto

    osen-webinar.svg

    I’m happy to announce that on August 1, 10am PDT/1pm EDT, I will be leading a webinar from the Linux Foundation on open source entrepreneurship. “What is that?” you may ask. Open source entrepreneurship is the compendium of ideas around building your business process on open source principles. This means optimizing for open source collaboration, code and communities. Here are some qualities often exhibited by open source entrepreneurs:

    • Build on existing open source platforms
    • Abhor NIH and push teams away from it
    • Structure teams for massive collaboration
    • Allergic to corporate work silos
    • Have spent extensive time learning how to operate in open source communities
    • Tell anyone who will listen that product development is inefficient
    • Often heard saying, “There’s an upstream community/ecosystem already working on that. You should join that effort.”

    As we learn more about the pervasiveness and ubiquity of open source code, we’re finding that “open source” means so much more than what license you use or the source code you utilize. Open source is now a term of art that includes the process of collaboration, process automation, and building on the work of external ecosystems. Every product manager, engineering manager, investor, CIO/CTO and, yes, entrepreneur needs to understand these concepts intuitively.

    From this webinar, attendees will gain an understanding of what it means to practice the art of open source entrepreneurship and optimize their business for the continuing open source revolution.

    Register for the webinar now!

  • Announcing OSEN Seattle Meetup on Aug 2

    I’m happy to announce that we now have a space in Seattle to host a meetup on August 2. RSVP at meetup.com.

    https://www.meetup.com/OSENMeetupSEA/events/241851767/

    We’re looking forward to getting to know members of the Seattle open source entrepreneur community!

    This will be a chance to meet and talk to experienced open sourcerers in the area. Come and trade best practices and anti-patterns with others looking to make the most of their open source experience. Open Source has transformed the technology world, and this is your opportunity to learn from the best. To spur discussion, we will feature the following speakers:

    There is no Open Source Business Model

    Stephen Walli: former Microsoft and Outercurve open source engineering lead, currently Docker’s open source strategist. Twitter: @stephenrwalli

    There are best practices to understand when building products from open source software, but there are a number of anti-patterns that crop up along the way. Product teams (from engineering to marketing) need to understand these patterns and practices to participate best in open source project communities and deliver products and services to their customers at the same time. These patterns hold regardless of whether the vendor created and owns the project or participates in projects outside their control.

    Building a business on OSS – whats in it for the community

    Steve Mayzak: VP Solution Architecture at Elastic. Twitter: @smayzak

    Steve will talk about his experiences working for Open Source companies and how the search for the best business model continues.  He has worked at Springsource and now Elastic and built teams of Solution Architects.  His goal has been to bring the best combination of OSS and Commercial software to the community to create a mutually beneficial relationship.  Whats good for the community has to be good for the business and vice versa.

    How to Utilize a Community Distribution in a Cloud Native Context

    John Mark Walker: long-time open source product, ecosystem and community expert and founder of the Open Source Entrepreneur Network. Twitter: @johnmark

    In olden times, when we used IRC and liked it, there were several steps along the way from creating an open source project to releasing a product. Some of these were artifacts of the (lack of) tooling of the time, such as the need to assemble pieces into a whole before releasing as a product. That “first cut” of distribution became a community project in itself. Now that we have better, automated tooling for development, you may be fooled into believing that this “first cut” step is no longer needed. Au Contraire! John Mark will demonstrate why this is still necessary with examples from Fedora, CloudFoundry and Moby.

    Food and beverages will be served!