Top analyst with Gartner got it completely wrong
I read this article on ZDNet today titled Is open source stifling innovation instead?
I disagree with 99% of what I read so I decided to share my opinion on it hoping to get yours as well. The quotes listed below come from Bob Hayward a Sr VP with Gartner Research. He supposedly is a prominent market analyst.
1- Developers could be discouraged from creating new software because of the multitude of open-source software available for free. This is further driven by major vendors that are making their software available as open source. Many of the big software vendors are now evaluating all the software products they produce and identifying those that are strategic to the company, and those that are becoming commoditized. After they have singled out a software offering which is not core or strategic to their business, or perhaps which is not making money in the market, they then make it open source.
I can't believe Gartner actually pays people a ton of money to say such things. This is actually saying the opposite. Small companies and individuals have an opportunity to innovate because they can leverage the work and R&D from big companies just by looking at and using their open source infrastructure software. Why would anybody innovate in a commoditized area? I believe that open source is actually pushing all the industry to constantly innovate. Vendors who cannot add value and stay at the top of the stack are naturally eliminated. In a way it's Darwinian and it's fine with me. The fact that we have JBoss and Tomcat today is forcing BEA to innovate, if they can't find the next growth area they will either have to open source their stack (like Sun just did) and potentially become a service play or die. Linux is pushing Microsoft to think about what they should do to keep their lead on the desktop and the list goes on and on.
2- Let's say some smart kid wants to write the world's greatest piece of software, but (he has) got two problems now. One, he has got to be careful not to be in the way of Microsoft, IBM, Oracle or SAP. If you're on their road, you could be roadkill. Two to make money out of this commercial software, he has all these free, open-source software that he has got to try to navigate through. This young developer, in order to ensure his product is unique and marketable, would have to check that it is not similar to another open-source software that is already available in the market.
That's called competition! This kid is not that smart if he doesn't study all competition open source or not. And yes if there is an open source solution to the problem he is trying to address he should either do something else or leverage the existing
3- Bob is skeptical about the spate of big software vendors giving away the source codes of their products. They are very rational and pragmatic about it. It's good PR (public relations) and they seem to be good corporate citizens giving these contributions to the world. Most of the time though what they're doing is offloading a burden, and basically asking the open-source communities to take on that project.
I happen to agree with Bob on the PR aspect but I completely disagree with everything else. This is where you see that Bob has no idea how What do you think?
In conclusion I can't believe what I read from Gartner, I certainly think OSS has changed the way distributed teams collaborate to write/package/sell software, but I strongly believe OSS is actually playing a positive role in the software market by keeping all software vendors on their toes and weeding out those who cannot stay ahead of the innovation curve.
What do you think?