 |
MEET THE MEMBERS - SUMMARY Offshore
Outsourcing: The Pros, The Cons Sponsored by:
Baltimore, MD (August 31, 2004) --- "Open Source" is not just a buzzword. It is a solid trend that has both business and technical folks rethinking software development and licensing. Today's Meet the Members panel addressed open source from many different sides, discussing the implications of using open source software and its practical applications for businesses. Guided by moderator Larry Fiorino, CEO of G1440, the panel included
Keith Moulsdale, Partner at Whiteford, Taylor & Preston, LLP,
Pete Nash, Windows Platform Architect for Microsoft, Martin Roesch,
CTO of Sourcefire, and Bob Ungaretti, CEO of Raven Technologies. Another type of license is an Open Source Initiative license, which has fewer restrictions than the GPL, and allows for an open source project to be distributed commercially at some point. Moulsdale clarified that though the GPL and Open Source Initiative licenses are the most common, companies can basically create their own licensing models, resulting in countless types of licenses. The panelists all agreed that there is no universal definition for open source or its licenses. The licenses monitoring open source software have many different elements to them. Ungaretti explained that under the GPL license, if you make modifications to existing open source software, you are able to freely distribute it, but may not sell it. Roesch described a general rule when dealing with open source software licensing: "if you write software that uses open source, modify the open source software, or extend the open source software by actually developing code that links against the open source code, then the code you write has to be open source. If you develop software on top of open source, it doesn't necessarily have to be." This rule can prevent different open source softwares from conflicting with one another when they are being used on the same system. After the discussion of open source licensing, the panelists discussed the number of licenses in existence. Moulsdale noticed, "There's a huge misconception here that there are a billion open source licenses and they are out of control. It's not like that. In fact, the reverse is true. There are substantially more closed source licenses, because that's been our traditional model with Microsoft." Therefore, though there are many different types of open source licenses, businesses traditionally use closed source licenses more often for their products. Open source licenses have less standard rules, but the Open Source Initiative helps make the licenses somewhat more standardized. According to Roesch, having an OSI-approved license "makes the open source community a lot happier about including it." Additionally, as Ungaretti pointed out, some standardization in terms of software compatibility is crucial to an application's success. "With respect to inoperable compatibility standards," he said, "those are inherited by the existing standards on the books. It's more or less survival of the fittest. If the program works and is adopted and is popular and supported, it will survive. If it's not popular and it doesn't work, it's going to die. So I think it's going to be the best program wins." When deciding whether to create or purchase open source software, one must consider the benefits it provides. Moulsdale stated that open source licensing and distribution offers end users the chance to "save massive amounts of money," but Fiorino countered that argument by mentioning that different studies say opposite things about the potential cost benefits of using open source. Moulsdale later agreed, saying, "I don't think you can say open source is always cheaper in the long run or short run, or that closed source is always cheaper or more expensive in the long run. It depends on the situation." The panelists explained the different costs of using open source even though the initial product is usually available for free download. Ungaretti clarified that though the product may be free, few people are able to get the program up and running without the help of a developer. Therefore, many open source software users buy the packaged product from a company that makes the software usable. However, this option allows the user to make the application more tailored to their needs. After the overview of open source, Roesch shared his first-hand experience with creating open source software. In 1998, Roesch created his "Snort" software, which was modified through an extensive open source network. With the "many eyes make all bugs shallow" approach, it allowed him to quickly repair problems or bugs with his program because people found them quickly. His experience was a very positive one, and he explained, "If you use [open source] appropriately you can develop some very, very high quality software on a shoestring." Though he admits it did not speed his development, he saved a lot of time in the quality assurance process, because it was going on simultaneously with the product's creation. Ungaretti mentioned that though this system works well, it could cause problems if a program is released then constantly upgraded. Too many upgrades will make it difficult for an end user to use the product effectively. However, an audience member later brought up the fact that many commercial, closed-source software applications also experience frequent upgrades. To end, the panel discussed the future of open source, particularly from a legal perspective. They generally agreed that they hope not too many legal standards are imposed, because that would inherently go against what open source is. Moulsdale explained it as "the fewer statutes involved and less laws passed to control it, the more freedom people have to invent and create business models." The open source debate is sure to continue as open source software matures. Today's panel supplied a lively discussion rich with information from both sides. |
|
|
