Some argue that open-source software can't innovate. In fact, one of the industry's former executives, Peter Yared, recently argued that "the only successful open-source companies sell commodities."
Yared clearly hasn't heard of SpringSource, an open-source application platform provider that is redefining the J2EE application server and, quite possibly, the future of open source.
Yared isn't alone in his beliefs. A friend recently wrote me to suggest that open source is at its best when disrupting big, profitable markets:
Commercial open source is a (commodity) replacement market. When it is not (i.e., people are building new, never-done-before cool/future-proof apps with open-source technology), then it is a pure-play Internet-based business model, one that is becoming so specific/demanding that people will want full control and (to) develop their own stuff, e.g., Google, Facebook, and others that heavily use open source to build their Web services.
SpringSource and its ubiquitous Spring Framework, however, promise something different. Something much more ambitious. Not only does Spring challenge the status quo in application development, deployment, and management (Hyperic), but SpringSource is proving that commercial open source can peacefully coexist with community involvement.
In a conversation with Spring creator and SpringSource founder Rod Johnson, he clarified SpringSource's competitive differentiation:
The essence of SpringSource is that we're not a commodity play but have a far more ambitious agenda. We're not interested in replicating what closed-source vendors already offer, at lower price: We are providing a superior experience to developers and operations teams--for example, in our integrated approach to unifying the application life cycle from developer desktop to the data center--which doesn't presently exist in Java.
Of course, our offerings are also leaner (more productive and faster), cheaper and more open than those of the old incumbents, and that's a huge selling point in today's market. But we're focused on being the enterprise Java leader--and not merely in open source.
SpringSource's mantra: Managing the full Java life cycle.
(Credit: SpringSource)SpringSource isn't simply replacing IBM WebSphere, Oracle WebLogic, or Red Hat JBoss application servers. It is actually doing much more, and it offers, in my opinion, the best example of just how disruptive an open-source vendor can be precisely because SpringSource isn't seeking to be the open-source leader in Java, but the leader, period.
Gartner estimates that there are currently at least 2 million Spring developers, an impressive number suggesting that the Java community is looking to Spring to help it migrate Java applications onto lighter-weight containers (Tc Server), across highly virtualized environments, and ultimately to the cloud. Given SpringSource's strong financial performance, the company seems to be doing a good job of monetizing a significant percentage of that Spring adoption.
After meeting with the SpringSource executive team at its San Mateo, Calif., offices a few weeks ago to discuss its strategy, I'm convinced that the company is on track to improve that percentage significantly too.
We're at the point when it's not enough to be "the Red Hat of (CRM, ECM, ERP, etc.)." In a bad economy that sees open-source solutions adopted at an ever-increasing pace, now growing at a 22 percent CAGR (compound annual growth rate), according to IDC, it's time for open-source vendors to lead and develop markets, not simply follow in the wake of established proprietary vendors, picking up their crumbs.
SpringSource is demonstrating how it can be done. It's an aggressive company with the finances, management, and product ambition to become a very big player in enterprise IT within just a few short years. It's a company that Microsoft should fear and that Oracle or IBM should buy.
Of course, SpringSource being SpringSource, it might actually be planning to buy Oracle or IBM instead.
Follow me on Twitter @mjasay.
There was a time when vendors knew how to color inside the lines. A database vendor sold databases. An operating system vendor peddled operating systems. And application server vendors were in the business of selling application servers.
Customers knew what "application server" meant, which is what paved the way for low-cost, high-value open-source application servers like JBoss, Geronimo, and others to arise. The category was well understood. The only thing the customer had to decide was whether she wished to overspend on a brand-name application server or buy into an open-source upstart.
As the economy continues to pressure IT budgets, a new breed of application server is rising, one that doesn't color nicely within the lines of the traditional "app server" definition.
First there was SpringSource, which in April 2008 claimed it had developed the first "proper Java application server" to hit the market in more than 10 years. IBM, Oracle, and Red Hat (JBoss) must have found this surprising, given that "proper Java application servers" were what they presumed to be selling to their customers.
SpringSource, pressing the issue further, this week announced Spring Roo, an "interactive, lightweight, user-customizable tooling that enables rapid delivery of high-performance enterprise Java applications." At just 4MB, Spring Roo is tiny, but its promise is big: "working applications within 10 minutes of finishing the download" (video here).
Red Hat is taking notice of SpringSource's moves, but SpringSource founder Rod Johnson is dismissive of Red Hat's ability to compete:
Red Hat recently announced a defensive move (JBoss Open Choice strategy) motivated by trying to play catch-up with SpringSource. Clearly the momentum of SpringSource tc Server and dm Server has Red Hat worried, along with the continued advance of the Spring Framework as the de facto standard component model for enterprise Java.
The "JBoss Open Choice strategy" appears to be a repackaging, rather than new technology, which attempts to position JBoss as still relevant in a brave new world of changing requirements. On a positive note, it appears Red Hat has finally realized that many developers and customers have long since moved away from the full Java EE stack; that the traditional heavyweight application server has declined in importance; and that the Spring programming model is important to their customer base.
The paint is barely dry on JBoss' incursion into IBM's and Oracle's application server territory, and already it's under attack from SpringSource, which is positioning JBoss as old technology, despite barely being out of its teens. It's a sharp attack, but perhaps a sign of open-source competition to come.
Consider MindTouch. The entire idea of a Java application server got a shaking this week from MindTouch, which announced a new application packaging feature for its collaboration platform, as TechCrunch reports. This feature:
(A)llows developers to create a compressed file for import into other MindTouch instances, letting enterprise users install add-on applications easily. This addition represents MindTouch's ambitions to become an application platform where installing applications (is) as easy as adding Firefox add-ons.
This may not sound very groundbreaking, until you consider that MindTouch is essentially announcing that it has turned the wiki into an application platform. Until last year MindTouch was mostly known for its DekiWiki technology. This application-packaging technology basically allows customers to build on wiki collaboration, which is much more than just a MediaWiki-style wiki, as ReadWriteWeb notes.
Neither SpringSource nor MindTouch fit the old application server mold, but it's not clear customers should care. Enterprises just want to get work done.
Just as Google is shaking up e-mail with Wave and Wolfram Alpha is redefining a corner of search, so too are SpringSource and MindTouch redefining what application server means for the modern enterprise, while open-source companies like Acquia redefine Web content management, Marketcetera pushes the envelope on financial trading platforms, etc.
Open source is the new innovator, and not merely the commodifying force in the market.
Indeed, with traditional software markets perhaps reaching a critical saturation point, we may see much more "coloring outside the lines" in enterprise software from open-source projects and companies. Oracle's response has been to consolidate, but others seem to be responding with a different strategy: innovation.
Disclosure: I am an adviser to MindTouch. Red Hat is a business partner. Acquia is in some ways a competitor.
Follow me on Twitter @mjasay.
I read the news that SpringSource has named itself the "first proper" Java application server product in a decade, and I was left scratching my head. Over the years I've heard just about everyone call themselves an "app server" at some point (Funambol went through a spell when it was a "mobile application server" [PDF] and ActiveGrid was a "grid application server", or something, as just two examples), and the only two times it made sense to me (in the open-source context) were with JBoss and Geronimo.
How did SpringSource become an application server? I thought it was a framework.
So, apparently, does Marc Fleury, who had some blunt counsel for SpringSource's founder, Rod Johnson:
To me this is a VC driven move. Spring is a natural consultancy, being a development framework, but they have been struggling with their sales in the runtime. So voila, we now have a box drawn around an OSGi kernel, the Spring framework and Hibernate/Tomcat, and it has a name: it's an application server. It is the same thing you had yesterday for free, except it is now under the GPL and a proprietary subscription license.
... Read more
Red Hat's JBoss division has big plans for the future. Fortunately, it's not squandering its development pool to get there.
JBoss was always an ambitious project and company. It would appear that not much has changed now that JBoss is a division within Red Hat, as Red Hat announced today its intention to push JBoss into 50 percent of enterprise middleware workloads by 2015. This isn't 50 percent of all installed middleware, but rather than half of every new enterprise middleware deployments in 2015 will be JBoss.
That's pretty impressive, even if only aspirational at this point.
Much more interesting to me than this marketing aspiration (as this really is all such a number can be at this point, given that we're eight years away from being able to measure the claim) is the fact that the JBoss development team is still intact. For Red Hat to reach its ambitions, it has to retain good employees that contribute to that vision, and specifically the developers who lead and develop the projects.
During Red Hat's press conference on JBoss today, therefore, I asked if the reported JBoss defections had hurt JBoss' momentum.
... Read moreApparently, Larry Ellison didn't like the idea of anyone getting more than a few minutes of press for an acquisition. Following on the heels of Sun's acquisition of MySQL, Oracle is announcing that it is buying everyone else on the planet to prevent this from happening again.
No, actually, Oracle has announced that it is buying BEA Systems for $8.5 billion. The proprietary world just got even more consolidated with less choice and higher costs for buyers.
... Read more
An analyst friend emailed me the other day to get my opinion on the analyst community's negative Red Hat pile-on. Bank of America, Global Equities Research, and others have recently been hand-wringing over Red Hat's future, suggesting that its JBoss business is stalling, that it's "losing momentum" in emerging markets like China, and (here's the one I find immensely laughable) that hardware vendors like HP are having to step in to fill Red Hat's failing shoes on support.
Trip Chowdhry of Global Equities Research tried to outdo this list, however, arguing that not only does Red Hat stink, but the entire LAMP ecosystem is rubbish, too. He declares that .Net is winning developers' hearts and minds while the LAMP stack is on its way to relegation to the dustbin of history. His bias exposed (just as mine is here: I'm an open-source believer and see rampant uptake of LAMP and open source throughout the enterprise), he has his 15 seconds of fame. Time to move on.
One thing, however, bears further investigation. JBoss. The consensus view from analysts seems to be that JBoss is Red Hat's Achilles Heel. Let's take a look at some data to get a better picture.
... Read moreIan Howells, Alfresco's chief marketing officer, did some analysis of the company's customer and user community, and I found the results interesting. I've been hearing rumblings for some time that Windows increasingly serves as a great evaluation platform for open source, 
but most companies use Linux when they're serious and want to go into production. Ian's data confirmed this, and more. (Zmanda has published data that corroborates our findings.)
First of all, the Alfresco data shows that Windows is plays a healthy role in the open source ecosystem. (In the graph, Windows = green, and Linux = blue, in case you can't see it well.) We have plenty of companies going into production with open-source Alfresco sitting on top of closed-source Windows. From my work with SugarCRM, JasperSoft and others, I know the same holds true for them. I don't suspect that this is going to change anytime soon.
Windows plays a large role because it's the OS sitting on the most desktops. But when customers are serious about production, the majority favor Linux. Again, I think you'd find very similar results were you to talk with MuleSource, Funambol, SugarCRM, etc.
... Read more- prev
- 1
- next
