RE: Open Source Developer (Economics)
Chip Mefford <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.misc.free-software-business |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Thu, 20 Mar 2003, Chris Maeda wrote: > I've never seen an enterprise software sales cycle where > sue-ability was a factor. From a small/mid sized business perspective, the angst seems to resolve around being sued by the software vendor, not the other way around. GPLed software alleviates this. > If an enterprise wants to use an open source line of business system > today, they would have to pay armies of contractors to spend > months writing and rewriting the system before they could even > think about deploying it. Pay the contractors, or pay the contractors. Nothing "shrink-wrapped" ever works out of the box anyway, unless the spec is written to fit the offering. > Having said that, it may be the time for open source to build > business software systems targeted at the needs of small businesses. I completely concurr. I am also biased. The large enterprise rollouts seemed tied to certain software vendors, and many of these huge corporations don't actually seem to be concerned with controlling costs. There is a point at which large corporate economics escapes simple logic. For the small/mid companies, with personel in the range of 5 to 500, they must make profits or perish. More than just few are staring down both barrells of "License 6" and seeing the handwriting on the wall. There seems to be a very real problem that I am unable to properly articulate that has to do with Government and Large Enterprise buy-in of a single platform/architechture that seems to exclude or at least strongly discourage contractors and service vendors from using anything other than what they use. Case in point. Currently, there is a pretty large project going on in the US that has to do with mapping all of the environmental resources. All of them. This is known as GIS. GIS is defined as; "A system of computer software, hardware, data and personel to help manipulate, analyze and present information that is tied to a spatial location..." GIS is in reality a family of products and derived data products tied pretty much wholly to software published by ESRI. Folks who deal with GIS products, must deal with ESRI. This includes all government agencies, timber and mining companies, folks doing biological and foresty assesments and surveys must be tied to this infrastructure. The way it works in the field, is that when the USGS wants some data aquired, they contract their service vendors, usually so-called non-profits that are partnered with ESRI and Microsoft and pay and pay. The taxpayer foots the bill to keep the Microsoft monopoly as healthy as possible. ESRI is world-wide. Doing pretty much all the GIS work. In point of fact, ESRI *is* GIS. GIS is one place where GPLed software could have made a huge difference. As ESRI moves toward MS Longhorn, the lock-in is complete. The whole play is huge, but also out of the public eye for the most part, and I sincerely expect that this type of techology tie-in is rampant throughout all industries and US government projects.This is just one small aspect that I am aware of. The end-game is not at all clear, and the smart money is on the historical winners. IMHO, I really think that focusing on small-mid businesses and non-profits will reap more rewards in the long run than going after the large corporate customers who don't seem to care how much money they spend to keep the big players fat and happy. chipper