Mark Driver

We’ve just published our 2010 predictions research note for open source.  Clients can find it here and can view last year’s here as well.

This research note is a list of some heavy hitting trends that will have a significant impact over the next 12 to 36 months.  It is certainly not the total extent of our OSS related research for the year but is meant as a jumping off point for the 2010 agenda.

For 2010 year we’ve focused on 3 predictions related to the “business of open source”.  Its impossible to do justice to the complete rationale behind these predictions without reading the full note but I’ll share some very brief commentary here anyway.

I’d strongly encourage clients to read the note and even schedule a direct phone conversation to dig into the meat of the predictions and the rationale behind each one..

As an aside, we once assigned probabilities to our strategic planning assumptions (predictions) but in recent years we’ve dropped that practice. Personally I miss the probabilities, they allowed us to make forward thinking statements with measured degrees of confidence.  For example…

• A 60% probability meant the the prediction was based mostly on a hunch with very limited analytical evidence beyond a small niche of technology elites.
• A 70% probability meant that we saw early evidence to suggest a strong degree of confidence. For example we might be aware of early vendor R&D pipelines, or innovator/early-adopter activities.
• An 80% probability meant that we saw very strong momentum among early majority adopters, vendor product portfolios, etc.
• A 90% probability meant the prediction was virtually a done deal

Typically, predictions would start with a 5 year time line and low probabilities the probabilities would grow as the timeline shrank or we’d abandon the SPA and report why if it didn’t track as predicted.  IMO the model worked very well but alas we don’t use probabilities anymore.  The reasons are varied but we apparently received a lot of feedback that clients simply didn’t understand or consider them in most SPA’s.

The reason mention this is because without probabilities our predictions often come across as “crystal ball’ efforts when in reality there is a lot of research and analyst behind each one. I’ve added probabilities back in this blog entry in an attempt to increase the context of each SPA.

Strategic Planning Assumptions

• By 2011, growing diversity among open-source adopters will result in three distinct categories of OSS: (1) community projects, with broad developer networks; (2) vendor-centric projects controlled by commercial technology providers; (3) and commercial community projects, which have vendor-independent support channels.

90% probability.  To those with an ‘inside baseball’ perspective on OSS this is already reality.  However most in the mainstream IT community are unaware of the diversity among OSS projects and the recent trends toward vendor controlled communities.  In the next couple of years the issues will become much better understood and we will begin to see a true taxonomy emerge.

• By 2012, at least 70% of the revenue from commercial OSS will come from vendor-centric projects with dual-license business models.

80% probability.  This is may true today but the lack of revenue among broader market OSS products compared to Linux isn’t large enough yet to make this one a done deal.  What is clear is that the overwhelming majority of ‘commercial oss’ efforts are based on a dual license model – vendor prefer the ‘open core’ moniker because it sounds more OSS friendly but its essentially the same thing.

• By 2013, more than 50% of new open-source projects will leverage licenses that require code reciprocity (aka “affero”-style licenses) when hosted on external-facing servers; this is an increase from fewer than 5% in 2009.

60% probability.  This prediction is perhaps most controversial.  Its based on a growing trend among new projects I’m tracking, commercial vendor trends, and investor strategies.  This is one to watch.

Key Findings

• The open source software (OSS) model is not anti-commercial, but it doesn’t depend on commercial success.
• More-conservative open-source adopters will require a more robust commercial support channel for open-source solutions than technologically aggressive adopters. In these cases, users must often accept compromises between the “open” nature of the OSS model and the competitive realities of commercial software providers.
• The most successful commercial, open-source vendor strategies rely on dual-license strategies that blend elements of traditional closed-source and open-source dynamics.

Recommendations

• Differentiate the specific requirements for meeting minimal levels of quality of service (QoS) for individual open-source projects based on maturity and adopter profile.
• Integrate commercial open-source support strategies into broader enterprise software asset management initiatives.
• Understand that vendor-centric OSS will sacrifice the breadth and depth of the large developer community for stronger commercial support from a smaller number (often only one) of vendors.
• Plan for changes in historical open-source licensing and business models driven by emerging software as a service (SaaS) and cloud-computing infrastructures.

ColdFusion has been around practically as long as the web itself .  Today it retains a loyal but relatively small developer base (Adobe counts it at around 750K developers compared to my own estimates of about 48 trillion for .NET). 

Overall CF has lost market share percentage to competing technologies for years (ASP, Java, PHP, etc.)  and in virtually all cases when a developer tool loses momentum like this, it results in an inevitable march to oblivion — albeit sometimes a very slow one.  AD tools generaly dont make a market turn-around, instead developers migrate to the next big thing and rarely look back.   But if it CAN happen then it SHOULD happen with ColdFusion.  It is far to easy to pigeon-hole CF as a ‘legacy’ toolset but if you did you’d be wrong. 

Adobe has just released version 9 with an impressive list of new features that stand toe-to-toe with anything you’ll find from Microsoft, IBM, Oracle, or any of the elite open source options as well.  

Yes, CF is still very much a proprietary toolset — despite growing OSS options.  But many web developers are also finding that sometimes a little proprietary (emphase on “little”) is worth it if you can cut your development time by an order magnitude. 

Here’s the bottom line: no other web development toolset available today gives you an equal balance of flexibilility, scalability and  out-of-the-box RAD experience for dynamic web applications than ColdFusion.  There are plenty that do a better job one of these areas; there are few that do a slightly better job in two out of three; but there are none that match CF in all three areas. 

Have you looked at ColdFusion recently?  If not then start with my recent research note (assuming your a Gartner client of course)and then check out the newest version at http://www.adobe.com/products/coldfusion/

p.s. looks like Adobe has a copy of the report here as well.

My colleague Ray Valdes has posted a nice blog entry regarding the announcement on Monday at Adobe’s Max Conference that Flash applications will be deployable to Apple’s iphone.  Here’s my take…

A major theme of this year’s conference was the upcoming 10.1 release of the Flash player targeted specifically at a wide range of smart phone devices.  Adobe has covered nearly all the bases but Apple remains the missing piece — a massive missing piece — of the Flash ubiquity story.

It pretty clear why Adobe wants Flash on the iphone but Apple says no, pointing to potential performance issues as the major reason.  Of course, this is smokescreen in this analyst’s humble opinion.

The main reason Apple says no to Flash is in order to maintain tight control over rich application experiences through its application store. In other words, if I can access cool Flash games via safari with built in flash then why would I pay for them or more specifically why would I pay Apple for them?

Effectively, a true Flash experience on the iphone (or any device for that matter) makes it impossible to police the content on the device (from porn to games and everything in between).  This is unacceptable to Apple.

On Monday Adobe announced Flash applications on the iPhone. But… not really… at least not entirely.

Basically the next generation of the Flash developer IDE will allow you to compile Flash applications down to native iphone code passing the need for the flash run-time player altogether. However, these applications wont run in the brower  and must still be accessed and installed via Apple’s app store.  So Apple loses nothing and Adobe get less than they wanted — far less.

However there’s still real value here.  Developers get another tool set to develop iphone applications.  Apple gets a massive influx of new applications to its device.   So Adobe get its foothold on the iphone — maybe a toehold.  No true “Flash on the web” experience but standalone applications are the next best thing. Overall its a good move for everyone involved except…

1.  I’ve always been weary of cross compilers.  If the process turns out to be truly turn-key with complete compatibility and performance then GREAT.   If not then it could lead to a nightmare of forked code.

2. As a more subtle but longer reaching issue, I fear that Adobe’s announcement may damage its own the long standing message behind Flash.  The run-time has been the key but now (when push comes to shove) it doesn’t seem the run-time is as important as it might appear. If Flash can create native compiled applications for the iphone then why not RIM and Palm as well?

Personally I’m torn.  Yes its cool to have Flash applicaitons (if not the  ‘Flash” runtime) on the iphone.  However its also not the true ‘Flash as an integral element of web’ message that Adobe evangelizes either.  Its a step forward no doubt but it doesn’t close the book on the issue by far.

I just published a research note that outlines some key trends and strategies to maximize OSS investments in the ‘down’ economy.  You can find it here.

Let me know what you think.

How is your IT org leveraging OSS in today’s IT environment?

Last updated on 5/13/09

Disclaimer: This is pretty much for Gartner clients since non-clients cant actually get to the content. However it should give you a good idea of the open source related material we cover at Gartner nonetheless.  I’ll update this blog entry from time to time so this one is a good bookmark candidate.

We cover the topic of open source in a wide range of research notes but the fastest way to find the latest and greatest is just by searching the website for title and subject. Be sure to include “archived” research to get some of the older – but still viable – research pieces.

Here are a few links to research directly related to open source software on Gartner.com.  This is by NO means a complete list – far from it actually – you will find a lot more directly on the Gartner website.

Learn the Basic Principles of Open-Source Software contains the official Gartner definition of open source and is our basic primer on the topic.

Establish an Enterprise Open-Source Policy to Maximize Value and Minimize Risk outlines a number of key best practices in establishing a policy to successfully adopt and manage OSS in the enterprise.

NEW Findings: Vendor Mergers and Acquisitions Have a Limited Impact on Open-Source Efforts is a quick note that discusses the level of impact vendor acquisitions have on open source projects.

The State of Open Source, 2008 was a LARGE special report we did last year covering a wide number of topics related to open source.  We’ll continue the effort in ‘09 but plan on breaking into smaller (more digestible) pieces throughout the year.

Predicts 2009: The Evolving Open-Source Software Model is the latest version of our annual report that outlines some key predictions for open source over the coming year or so.

Every year we publish a “Key Issues” note that describes our research focus for open source.  We are updating that now for 2009 but Key Issues for Open-Source Software, 2008 is pretty up-to-date as well.

Findings: Yes, You Can Save Money With Open-Source Software is a short note outlining some important factors if you plan to leverage open source in hopes of saving money.

My colleague Laurie Wurster and others track the impact of open source of commercial software markets.

• Forecast: Open-Source Impact on Infrastructure Software, Worldwide and Regional, 2007-2012
• Forecast: Open-Source Impact on Application Software, Worldwide and Regional, 2007-2012

User Survey Analysis: Open-Source Software, Worldwide, 2008 has some great feedback directly from open source users that shows some very interesting trends in adoption.

I just published a short “finding” research note on leveraging open source to save money.

Clients can find it here. It’s a very short piece meant to serve as a quick place holder while I work on a much more in-depth note.  I hope to have that one ready by end of February.

Here is a quick excerpt with a couple of key points….

The challenge when optimizing cost with open-source software is twofold:

• First, cost must be reduced in one budget area (for example, acquisition cost), without that cost spilling over into other buckets (for example, service and support). Toward this end, adopters must avoid the common mistake of simply burying and obscuring costs by moving them from one budget area to another.
• Second, reducing budget costs with open source serves little purpose if you reduce the quality of service, or increase the risk beyond acceptable thresholds. Foregoing contracted service and support without realistic internal resource bandwidth to retain service levels will lead to catastrophe that could wipe away any illusion of cost savings.

This is of course old news to OSS insiders but you’d be amazed a the level of confusion I come across in many mainstream IT shops.  They are being inundated with so much fear, uncertainty, and doubt from both sides of the debate that they are often paralyzed to act one way or the other.

http://www.softwarefreedom.org/news/2008/dec/11/cisco-lawsuit/

The Software Freedom Law Center is the main watch dog for the GPL family of licenses.

Its rare that we see oss license litigation make it to court.  In most cases these issus are settled quietly behind closed doors.  But ironically the problem is that we dont have much modern case law on the books to create solid precidence behind many OSS license issues. 

Its sounds odd but its actually a good thing that some of these make it to a point where we can publicly see the outcome.  I for one will be watching this one closely. But then again who wants to bet both parties come to a agreement under non-disclosed terms shortly?

A good list of some major oss events last year…

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20090102-alook-back-at-the-open-source-victories-of-2008.html

I just published a new research note on dynamic (scripting) languages.  Gartner clients can find the full note here but the following is a quick highlight of the content….

Dynamic programming languages, such as PHP, Python and Ruby, are making their way into mainstream IT efforts. Although these tools provide new opportunities for IT organizations to maximize the business value of next-generation application development (AD) efforts, they come with a host of new challenges.