uug-list  

Re: [uug] Open Source vs. Closed Source software

Michael Torrie
Thu, 24 Mar 2005 22:48:10 -0800

On Thu, 2005-03-24 at 17:49 -0700, Grant Robinson wrote:
> It's quite easy for people to sit and pontificate about open-sourcing 
> things that they either a) do not own, or b) have a vested interest in. 
>   Witness IBM and Sun in their on-going battle over open-sourcing Java.  
> It totally benefits IBM, and Sun stands to lose control and face the 
> possibility having multiple incompatible implementations of Java.

The fragmentation issue has very little to do with something being open
or closed.  Placing Java under a completely free license would
dramatically accelerate its adoption in every aspect of the unix world.
As an example I give you the Mono project.  The mono project is a
completely open (and forkable) work and growing quite a bit.  They
follow the EMCA spec fairly well and have a high degree of compatibility
with MS's .NET implementation.

Mono's openness has the following advantage over Java:  Anyone can port
it to any platform.  Right now you need license from Sun to port Java to
an unsupported platform and then only a binary can be release for free
(the source remains under sun license).  Finding a Linux version of Java
for the Alpha or some other architecture is impossible and likely to
always be.  Mono may not reach Alpha either, but it could.

I am also extremely wary of vendor lock-in (I've been burned before).
There is nothing that says Java will always be available on terms that
make your business succeed, for example.  With Mono at least I know that
even if Novell completely turned about on me, I could use my own
ingenuity and make things run.  Having a gnu environment (not called
Java due to licensing) that can run Java apps and services provides a
safety net here, so this one argument is less serious than it once was.

IBM is investing in GPL (free) software for a reason.  They have finally
discovered that what goes around comes around.  Free software allows IBM
to raise the bar across the entire industry in a way that's fair to
everyone while allowing IBM to compete with industry in areas that
really matter and are exciting (IE goods and services built on top of
linux).  Sun has not yet "got it."  As such they will and are failing.
I'm coming to the conclusion that had MS not managed to position itself
into the monopoly position it finds itself in now that it would also be
dying.  Except that MS is way smarter than Sun and way to shrewd.  They
will compete directly with OSS using whatever means work.

Now having said that, Java's successes and failures to date have had
very little to do with free software or openness.  Java is a huge
success in the server arena, but a complete failure on the desktop.  I
anticipate that .NET will be a success on both counts, giving Java a run
for its money.  Whether Mono could succeed without Microsoft is another
story.  And whether or not Mono's advantages over Java for being GPL and
free really mean anything in the long term is unknown.

-- 
Michael Torrie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

--------------------
BYU Unix Users Group 
http://uug.byu.edu/ 

The opinions expressed in this message are the responsibility of their
author.  They are not endorsed by BYU, the BYU CS Department or BYU-UUG. 
___________________________________________________________________
List Info: http://uug.byu.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/uug-list