just my 2 cents, just crosspost the original mail to committ...@apache.org, for me this is the right audience, because bigger ;-)
regards, Achim 2015-04-17 12:36 GMT+02:00 Sergey Beryozkin <sberyoz...@gmail.com>: > Hi Raul > On 17/04/15 11:30, Raul Kripalani wrote: > >> Hey Sergey, >> >> Do you mean memb...@apache.org? I don't think I can post to that list as >> I >> am not an ASF member. >> > Sorry, I did not know you could not post, I guess Camel leads should work > on that given your long time support for Camel :-) > >> >> But yeah, even though TIBCO has used these arguments in the context of >> ESBs, they are the typical set of FUD arguments vs OSS... >> >> It would be cool to have a "wider" discussion... committ...@apache.org is >> for these things? >> >> I guess that would be a great place to do it too, yeah. I'm not > proposing for this thread to moved there (it is relevant being here), but > indeed it would be of interest too to a wider community :-) > > Thanks, Sergey > > > > > Raúl. >> >> On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 11:22 AM, Sergey Beryozkin <sberyoz...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> Hi Raul >>> Looks like Tibco is trying to prevent their customers from leaving with >>> this scary tactics :-) >>> >>> I think if you post it to the Apache members list the email thread you >>> initiate will be the most popular in years :-) >>> >>> Sergey >>> >>> On 17/04/15 11:13, Raul Kripalani wrote: >>> >>> Just found this marketing landing page published on social networks. >>>> It's >>>> made by TIBCO and attempts to highlight the downsides of Open Source >>>> ESBs. >>>> You don't need to be a rocket scientist to gather what exact ESB they >>>> are >>>> targeting (not us): just look at the images. >>>> >>>> http://www.tibco.com/integration/open-source-ESB-alternative >>>> >>>> Even though it's a clear exercise of FUD vs. OSS – as it provides no >>>> quantitive measurements to their claims (whatever happened to the >>>> scientific method...) – I was planning to write a rebuttal post in my >>>> blog, >>>> but I haven't updated it in a long time and it needs a bit of love >>>> first. >>>> >>>> So I thought I'd just publish my thoughts – as I wanted to get it out >>>> ASAP >>>> – and start a qualified discussion here... >>>> >>>> In particular I would like to dissect / take down their 4 "myths" about >>>> OSS >>>> ESBs: >>>> >>>> *> *Myth # 1 - Open Source ESB Software Is Free** >>>> >>>> (Their statement: OSS ESBs are not Free.) >>>> >>>> Well, no software has zero Total Cost of Ownership. As long as the world >>>> is >>>> *not* entirely controlled by androids, you will need humans to operate >>>> the >>>> software, including TIBCO's. What we need to look at are the costs of >>>> hiring those people and their learning curves. >>>> >>>> For Camel, any developer with Java, XML and a few other "commodity >>>> skills" >>>> will do. And they can get started in days. Many people in this forum got >>>> started in hours. >>>> >>>> For TIBCO, you need a specialised consultant because their stack is >>>> proprietary. Or you need to train them, and TIBCO training is not >>>> cheap. I >>>> have been a TIBCO consultant and I know this for a fact. Moreover, >>>> specialised (already trained) TIBCO consultants are not cheap either >>>> (like >>>> with most proprietary software – think SAP, Salesforce, etc.). >>>> >>>> Furthermore, brand new customers need consultancy to get started – and >>>> that >>>> is not cheap either. >>>> >>>> *> *Myth #2 - Open Source ESB Communities Innovate Faster** >>>> >>>> >>>> (Their statement: Proprietary ESB vendors innovate faster) >>>> >>>> This is plainly wrong. Just take a look at the release notes of TIBCO >>>> ActiveMatrix BusinessWorks. This [1] is the latest version, and there's >>>> a >>>> dropdown at the top to browse through past versions. >>>> >>>> To analyse this statement, we need to track two things at least: (1) >>>> frequency of releases, (2) new features introduced per release. >>>> >>>> About frequency of releases: >>>> >>>> TIBCO ActiveMatrix release line 6.x: 9 months between minor releases, 4 >>>> months between micro releases. >>>> >>>> [9 months] >>>> 6.1.0 (May 2014) ---> 6.2.0 (Nov 2014) >>>> 6.1.1 (Sep 2014) 6.2.1 (Mar 2015) >>>> [4 months] [4 months] >>>> >>>> Camel (analysing past 2 minor releases): less than 6 months between >>>> minors, >>>> less than 3 between micros. I noticed that 2.15.1 was released quite >>>> early, >>>> so I included another datapoint for one more 2.14.x micro release. >>>> >>>> [< 6 months] >>>> 2.14.0 (18 Sep 2014) ===> 2.15.0 (10 Mar 2015) >>>> 2.14.1 (16 Dec 2014) 2.15.1 (01 Apr 2015) >>>> [< 3 months] [< 20 days (special circumstance >>>> likely)] >>>> 2.14.2 (10 Mar 2014) >>>> [< 3 months] >>>> >>>> I know that analysing so few releases is not an indicative – ideally we >>>> would analyse the entire release history – but I don't have time right >>>> now. >>>> Nevertheless, the release policy of Camel is 6 months between majors >>>> and 3 >>>> months between micros (if I recall correctly). >>>> >>>> Next, let's take a look at the innovation aspect: >>>> * TIBCO AM BW 6.2.0 carries 22 new features [2], many of which have to >>>> do >>>> with their IDE, not with core functionality. >>>> * Camel 2.14.0 carried 38 new and noteworthy features, PLUS 15 new >>>> components, 1 data format, 1 new EIP (Circuit Breaker), etc. >>>> >>>> Judge for yourselves ;-) >>>> >>>> *> *Myth #3 - Access to Source Allows Reviewing Code and Deploying >>>> Safely** >>>> >>>> (Their statement: Access to source does not uncover vulnerabilities). >>>> >>>> Well, all software has vulnerabilities and with Open Source you can >>>> identify them yourself and fix them. With proprietary software, you rely >>>> entirely on the vendor's turnaround time. >>>> >>>> Moreover, we are very transparent about this and we publish our Security >>>> Advisories here [3]. >>>> >>>> *> *Myth #4 - Open Source and SaaS Work Well Together** >>>> >>>> They say: "Cloud-based open-source ESBs work just like other SaaS >>>> applications: you typically don't have access to the code. How well will >>>> it >>>> connect your on-premise applications with other SaaS services? You can't >>>> know." >>>> >>>> Well, that's just plain absurd. It amuses me that a closed-source vendor >>>> is >>>> using the "you don't have access to the code" against an Open Source >>>> product :D Makes zero sense, both marketing- and technical-wise. >>>> >>>> With TIBCO, you don't have access to the source on-premises nor >>>> cloud-based >>>> software. With the other vendor, you may not have access to the source >>>> of >>>> their iPaaS but you know it's largely based on the on-premises software, >>>> to >>>> which you have access (even though it's a "gated community" in the >>>> strict >>>> sense...). >>>> >>>> --- >>>> >>>> Discussion open! 1, 2, 3... GO! >>>> >>>> [1] >>>> https://docs.tibco.com/products/tibco-activematrix-businessworks-6-2-1 >>>> [2] >>>> >>>> >>>> https://docs.tibco.com/pub/activematrix_businessworks/6.2.0/TIB_BW_6.2.0_relnotes.pdf >>>> [3] https://camel.apache.org/security-advisories.data >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> >>>> *Raúl Kripalani* >>>> Apache Camel PMC Member & Committer | Enterprise Architect, Open Source >>>> Integration specialist >>>> http://about.me/raulkripalani | >>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/raulkripalani >>>> http://blog.raulkr.net | twitter: @raulvk >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> > -- Apache Member Apache Karaf <http://karaf.apache.org/> Committer & PMC OPS4J Pax Web <http://wiki.ops4j.org/display/paxweb/Pax+Web/> Committer & Project Lead blog <http://notizblog.nierbeck.de/> Co-Author of Apache Karaf Cookbook <http://bit.ly/1ps9rkS> Software Architect / Project Manager / Scrum Master
