Re: Open source WO (was: Apple, Microsoft, Java and the Web?)

> Because without open sourcing it, it's effectively dead.

Completely agree with Bruce.

It will be rather a "when", not an "if". That is the "Hypercard"
future I see coming....WO slowly moving into oblivion in the coming
years if it's *not* open sourced.

Again, I can't say (WWDC 2006 public statement is still not online)
why I bring up this topic again a this time, but it's crucial in my
view.

As long as Apple...

-  sold WO as a product/service (be it at NeXT up $50k as a high end
service/consulting product or later at Apple at $699 in an attempt to
stay in the web developer mass market)

- bundled WO with WO developer tools as part of Xcode

...I didn't bring the open source topic up.

Even as a free developer tool from 2005 onwards, you had to
(officially) buy a Mac to develop for it. Apple made money off it in
some form or another (from their point of view).

As you have heard certainly, Xcode 2.4 deprecates the WO developer
tools. (I know this doesn't mean they stop working tomorrow).  This is
public news.

It's also well-known for years that Apple doesn't market WO - nor
should it since it's free now...but WO should be just free as in beer
any longer.

In my opinion, Apple now either makes WO open source in the coming
months or the community could slowly fall apart and WO could very well
 go down the "Hypercard" route over time.

I'm not hoping for that - in fact I just spent time starting a new WO
Community Wiki on ObjectStyle.org in  the past few days - so I'm
hoping for the opposite.

But it's better to raise an opiniated voice on future directions
before it's too late.

As a first step, I'm gathering input what everyone's opinion is.

Marc

> I work for a
> company that does custom application development for very large companies.
> We recently evaluated Java frameworks for a project.  If WebObjects were
> open-sourced, I would have suggested that we use it for the project, because
> it would make it a safe choice.  But do you think I'm going to suggest that
> we use a product that's owned by Apple and has no marketing behind it
> whatsoever?  Uh uh.
>
> Bruce
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected]
> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Marc Oesch
> Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2006 12:02 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: Open source WO (was: Apple, Microsoft, Java and the Web?)
>
> Hello,
>
> >... let's say Apple did release the source of WebObjects, what would
> >     we do with it, and could we do whatever it is without the source?
>
> I will let others more qualified speak below and just summarize:
>
> # 1: Better WO Marketability (without Apple consumer brand image attached)
>
> # 2: Community bug fixes, which in return helps Apple.
>
> # 3: Thriving WO Community instead of Shrinking Community. Provides better
> Resources and Human Capital for Apple in the future.
>
> # 4: Faster adaptability and release turnout in response to trends (eg.
> recent ones such as AJAX)
>
> The mail quoted below is an excerpt from 2002, but still - even more IMO
> because WO is not longer a product - very valid today.  [1]
>
> >     I think this is a more productive approach than constantly asking
> >     for something that simply isn't going to happen.
>
> Why not in the future ?  The environment is changing fast and Apple should
> take a look and re-evaluate...
>
> - Major application server vendors are showing Open source is successful :
> IBM with Apache Geronimo/Gluecode, JBoss, Sun with GlassFish,
> ObjectWeb/RedHat with Jonas....the list goes on and on.
>
> - WO is not a product for Apple any longer, ie no direct money streams.
> (More on this point when the WWDC 2006 news are public)
>
> - Sun is open-sourcing Java in the coming months and 2007 (
> http://news.com.com/2100-7252_3-6105601.html ). Many people also thought
> this will never happen...
>
> Or to sum it up in a counter question: What are the reasons *not* to open
> source WO in the near future ?
>
> [1]  Mail: Why Open Source WO makes sense for Apple and the Community:
>
> > -------Reader's Digest Version-----------------
> >
> > Four reasons why Apple should open source WO/EOF:
> >
> > REASON #1: WO/EOF cannot be legitimate extensions of the Apple brand,
> > its value to the marketplace is only achieved through independence
> > from the Apple brand proper. Placing WO/EOF under an open source
> > license allows Apple to retain control. It also allows legitimacy to
> > and adoption by those who would not normally accept or adopt an Apple
> > product in this space.
> >
> > REASON #2: Because debugging is highly parallelizable, an open source
> > WO/EOF will increase the number of debuggers and therefor increase the
> > stability of the product over the long run by applying the skills of
> > many more engineers than Apple could ever hope to support as employees.
> > With a large enough user/co-developer community, all bugs can be
> > quickly quantified and understood allowing a fix to become obvious to
> > at least one member of the community.
> >
> > REASON #3: If Apple will treat the WO/EOF user community as if we were
> > their most valuable resource in terms of current and future
> > development of the product, we will become their most valuable
> > resource. Trusting us enough to share the source in an open source
> > fashion, will benefit Apple (and the application server market) in
> > ways they cannot even begin to imagine.
> >
> > REASON #4: Because there is no accounting for taste. That was the
> > first lesson of applied microeconomics my college professor taught me,
> > and it holds true today. Apple, as smart and cutting edge as it may
> > be, cannot anticipate the ways in which WO/EOF will be utilized or
> > improved upon by people in the field. Open source allows for faster
> > innovation and the ability to capture truly useful and novel ideas.
> >
>
> Source:
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/lucene-java-user/200205.mbox/%3CA66
> [email protected]%3E
>
> PS: I think Reason #3 (quoted in that mail) is even more valid today since
> Apple has since added / expanded high-profile inhouse
> applications: iTMS, .Mac and Apple Store...
> How to find and train applicants in the future if the community base is
> shrinking ?
>
> Marc
> _______________________________________________
> WebObjects-talk mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://www.omnigroup.com/mailman/listinfo/webobjects-talk
>
>