4 ms·

I was reading this FUD whitepaper just a while back, in which they are saying OSS is unsuitable for enterprises, unscalable, untested, insecure, etc. http://www

by jeswin 13y ago

I was reading this FUD whitepaper just a while back, in which they are saying OSS is unsuitable for enterprises, unscalable, untested, insecure, etc. http://www.oracle.com/us/products/middleware/cloud-app-foundation/weblogic/dod-and-open-source-software-2012277.pdf http://www.oracle.com/us/products/middleware/cloud-app-found... And then this.

chrissmeuk 13y ago
That whitepaper is for management and purchasing. The security patches are for the poor sysops who have to look after the mess left behind by the former. Every large commercial software company is just as bad. It was only a few years ago that Microsoft were doing the same, until they realised they could monetize open source software themselves[1] as well and decided to stop the badmouthing. [1] through azure and buying into major open source ecosystems to gain mindshare.
logn 13y ago
That whitepaper isn't really FUD. It's basically just explaining 'open source' to people who don't really get it. The paper explains that Oracle software includes open source software and then Oracle is arguing that they do a better job of developing, leveraging, integrating, and supporting FOSS than IT workers in gov't offices can. It's a fairly reasonable argument.
- chrissmeuk 13y ago
  I beg to differ. The UK government (finally) has got its act together in this department. We're seeing the NHS's core "Spine" system being rewritten using open source software (riak/erlang/ubuntu + others) and we have the excellent http://gov.uk/ http://gov.uk/ as well.
  - CircusAct 13y ago
    And then you have a look at the new Universal Credit scheme. Glad IT schemes to do with the NHS are improving though.
    - chrissmeuk 13y ago
      Good point. I do however feel that the government departments that have failed miserably on projects will start looking at more successful projects for inspiration. We'll be a few more £billion down by then but things will improve. HMRC's systems are pretty good these days as well (I just did my tax return online). Relatively smooth process for a large Java behemoth.
ksk 13y ago
You claim you read it, but they don't say that at all. What they're specifically saying is that government is not the ideal entity to be shepherding OSS projects. More specifically - Large Scale OSS projects that require a rigorous process and are mission critical. They observe that OSS Projects exhibit high quality primarily (though not exclusively) when there is a large financial motive to make the project high quality. (E.g. Linux, Firefox, and the other big hits). Now, Oracle might be against-OSS in general, but this paper is not the "FUD" that you're looking for.
- jeswin 13y ago
  The articles is littered with FUD: 1. Oracle is embracing and offering open source solutions as a viable way to complete simple software projects and as an adjunct to the development and deployment of more complex projects that are based on commercial software. - Open source for tiny projects. Oracle for the real work. Got it. 2. Another key issue facing government acquisition executives is the issue of indemnification. When a software company provides a product to its customers, it is expected to stand by its product, and is legally required to do so. In the case of open source, there are remarkably few companies willing or able to offer indemnification for their “products.” - There are several open source companies, which stand by their "products", and offer support contracts. 3. Load testing, system performance tuning, and system optimization are also expensive tasks. Commercial software companies have developed highly refined methodologies to perform these tasks. - I've worked some with Oracle databases. Most organizations are paying through the nose for little benefit; management loves whitepapers like this. 4. Oracle licenses commercial software to fill the gaps where open source does not fully address enterprise capability requirements. Automated Deployment & Provisioning ...Extreme Performance, High Availability, & Scalability - Ok. 5. If you are concerned with vendor lock-in, and you see open source solutions as a means of “owning” the code you want to run, a quick glance at the Open Source Initiative (OSI) can be daunting. Nearly 100 licensing regimes have gone through the license approval process. Open source is not free, nor is it easy to understand the strict legal terms and conditions associated with its use. - I've found the popular OSS licenses quite simple to understand and there are excellent explanations available; Most Open Source apps use one of these, though there might be 100 which are OSI approved. 6. And finally, the biggest one. The VA story. - https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/anecdotal https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/anecdotal Edit: OSI Licensing(5)

by jeswin 13y ago

chrissmeuk 13y ago

That whitepaper is for management and purchasing. The security patches are for the poor sysops who have to look after the mess left behind by the former. Every large commercial software company is just as bad. It was only a few years ago that Microsoft were doing the same, until they realised they could monetize open source software themselves[1] as well and decided to stop the badmouthing. [1] through azure and buying into major open source ecosystems to gain mindshare.

logn 13y ago

That whitepaper isn't really FUD. It's basically just explaining 'open source' to people who don't really get it. The paper explains that Oracle software includes open source software and then Oracle is arguing that they do a better job of developing, leveraging, integrating, and supporting FOSS than IT workers in gov't offices can. It's a fairly reasonable argument.

chrissmeuk 13y ago
I beg to differ. The UK government (finally) has got its act together in this department. We're seeing the NHS's core "Spine" system being rewritten using open source software (riak/erlang/ubuntu + others) and we have the excellent http://gov.uk/ http://gov.uk/ as well.
- CircusAct 13y ago
  And then you have a look at the new Universal Credit scheme. Glad IT schemes to do with the NHS are improving though.
  - chrissmeuk 13y ago
    Good point. I do however feel that the government departments that have failed miserably on projects will start looking at more successful projects for inspiration. We'll be a few more £billion down by then but things will improve. HMRC's systems are pretty good these days as well (I just did my tax return online). Relatively smooth process for a large Java behemoth.

ksk 13y ago

You claim you read it, but they don't say that at all. What they're specifically saying is that government is not the ideal entity to be shepherding OSS projects. More specifically - Large Scale OSS projects that require a rigorous process and are mission critical. They observe that OSS Projects exhibit high quality primarily (though not exclusively) when there is a large financial motive to make the project high quality. (E.g. Linux, Firefox, and the other big hits). Now, Oracle might be against-OSS in general, but this paper is not the "FUD" that you're looking for.

jeswin 13y ago
The articles is littered with FUD: 1. Oracle is embracing and offering open source solutions as a viable way to complete simple software projects and as an adjunct to the development and deployment of more complex projects that are based on commercial software. - Open source for tiny projects. Oracle for the real work. Got it. 2. Another key issue facing government acquisition executives is the issue of indemnification. When a software company provides a product to its customers, it is expected to stand by its product, and is legally required to do so. In the case of open source, there are remarkably few companies willing or able to offer indemnification for their “products.” - There are several open source companies, which stand by their "products", and offer support contracts. 3. Load testing, system performance tuning, and system optimization are also expensive tasks. Commercial software companies have developed highly refined methodologies to perform these tasks. - I've worked some with Oracle databases. Most organizations are paying through the nose for little benefit; management loves whitepapers like this. 4. Oracle licenses commercial software to fill the gaps where open source does not fully address enterprise capability requirements. Automated Deployment & Provisioning ...Extreme Performance, High Availability, & Scalability - Ok. 5. If you are concerned with vendor lock-in, and you see open source solutions as a means of “owning” the code you want to run, a quick glance at the Open Source Initiative (OSI) can be daunting. Nearly 100 licensing regimes have gone through the license approval process. Open source is not free, nor is it easy to understand the strict legal terms and conditions associated with its use. - I've found the popular OSS licenses quite simple to understand and there are excellent explanations available; Most Open Source apps use one of these, though there might be 100 which are OSI approved. 6. And finally, the biggest one. The VA story. - https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/anecdotal https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/anecdotal Edit: OSI Licensing(5)