IPMA Forum 2006Open Source DiscussionStuart McKeeNational Technology OfficerMicrosoft CorporationMay 23, 2006

Discussion points

• Software Licensing

• Software Business Model

• Software Development

Market OverviewIT Industry Trends

• Everyone agrees on one thing: the move to x86– Price/performance and flexibility driving change– Intel and IA HW vendors realizing gains

• Focus on security• Increasing pressures to do more with less• Broad web services movement• 24x7 availability essential in a global economy

Software Licensing

Software Licensing

• Several Models:– Commercial Software Development (CSD) Model– Open Source Licenses– Berkeley Software Distribution (BSD) License– GNU General Public License (GPL)– GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL)

There is a lot of confusion about the actual meaning of Open Source software.

• Have you had a legal review of the GPL (and the LGPL)?

• How does your use of GPL software affect your intellectual property rights?

• Are you using any software governed by the Lesser General Public License (LGPL) and, if so, how does that license affect your rights and obligations?

• What is the difference between “mere aggregation of modules” and “combining multiple modules into one program”?– How does this affect your Intellectual Property?

Some Important QuestionsYou Should Have Answers To

• Microsoft is sharing source code globally• 17 offerings, >1,500,000 developers, >60 countries• 12 of 17 programs allow modifications and distribution rights• Shared Source Licenses

– Microsoft Permissive License (Ms-PL) – Microsoft Community License (Ms-CL) – Microsoft Reference License (Ms-RL)

microsoft.com/sharedsourcesource@microsoft.com

Microsoft Shared Source Initiative

• Support Customers

• Enable New Developers

• Facilitate Teaching & Research

• Create Opportunities for Partners

• >80 MS projects• >600 non-MS projects• >2,000,000 developers

Business Model

FlexibleFlexible IntegratedIntegrated

CustomizableCustomizableArbitrary testingArbitrary testingDecentralizationDecentralizationCommunity or self Community or self supportsupportHigh degree of varianceHigh degree of varianceRapid Release CycleRapid Release CycleStability decreaseStability decrease

Reduced ComplexityReduced ComplexityQuality AssuranceQuality AssuranceCentralizationCentralizationCommercial supportCommercial supportPredictabilityPredictabilityTimed releaseTimed releaseStability increaseStability increase

Non-Commercial Distros

BSDs

Commercial Distros

Commercial Desktop-focused Distros

Academic

Operating System Continuum

Tradeoffs

Customers

GovernmentsIntellectualCommons

CommercialSoftwareIndustry

The Software Ecosystem

The Software Ecosystem

The importance of the software ecosystem Basic research

IP rights

Applied research

Product Development

Economic growth, tax revenue, and commercial contributions

Benefits of a flexible ecosystem Choice

Market pricing

Dialogue

Microsoft Ecosystem

Greater choice at competitive prices for Greater choice at competitive prices for services, applications, and supportservices, applications, and support

• Thousands of applications• 750,000 Microsoft partners• More than 450,000 MCSE

professionals• More than 1.5M MCP certification

holders• 6M+ developers• 2200 user groups• 400 community web sites• Largest ISV Community worldwide

Thriving Global EcosystemThriving Global Ecosystem

Development Model

Linux kernel contributionsLinux kernel contributionsSnapshot of Top

Contributors (September 2004) Redhat (4)• David Miller, Alan Cox, Dave

Jones, Alex ViroIBM (1)• Greg Kroah-HartmanNovell (1)• Jaroslav KyselaSGI (1)• Christoph HellwigARM Limited (1)• Russel KingOSDL (2)• Andrew Morton, Linus

Torvalds,

University of Iowa (1)• Kai GermaschewskiSamba (1)• Anton Blanchard

Of top 12, Of top 12, 10 are 10 are commercial commercial developersdevelopers

Few do most of work

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

% o

f ch

ang

es t

o 2

.6

Top 12 = 44%

Top 100 = 84% of work

• Most significant OSS trend over past 4 years– Corporate investment on every major OSS project– Production quality development, testing and ecosystem growth

• Result: Greater choice, better technology, more services

Many open-source products are successful because countless members of the periphery study the code, find faults, & suggest fixes

Linus’ LawLinus’ Law

Core Work Periphery Work

Tomcat 4.0 71.7% 28.3%

GNOME 81.1% 18.9%

Mozilla 89.6% 10.4%

Limited core team resources and large code bases means that binary testing is most common. Fixes depend on time, commitment and

testing of core teams.

Limited core team resources and large code bases means that binary testing is most common. Fixes depend on time, commitment and

testing of core teams.

http://www.vuse.vanderbilt.edu/~srs/three.unexpected.ppthttp://www.vuse.vanderbilt.edu/~srs/three.unexpected.ppt

OSS developers tend to focus on high-profile work– Coding vs. testing is more “fun” and receives more recognition in meritocracy– Community is leaning on commercial organizations to contribute testing

• Result - concentration of testing focus and increased influence from corporate sponsors• Security testing in particular is difficult for community – quality of tester is everything

OSS TestingThe Many Eyes Theory

Can Linus’ Law Keep Up With Linux?– Kernel 2.6.3 to 2.6.4 line changes - 192,361 added, 244,830 changed, & 143,740

deleted. (Source: http://www.linuxhq.com/kernel/)

SLOC

RedHat 7.1 30,000,000

Eclipse 1,310,322

OpenOffice 210,424http://www.spindazzle.org/green/index.php?p=33 http://www.spindazzle.org/green/index.php?p=33

• Community reaches beyond source code

• Transparency and collaboration

• Compelling technology is primary driver of interest

Channel 9Channel 9

850,000 UU/mo

(3,000 posts)

MSCOMCommunity Sites

MSCOMCommunity Sites

500,000 UU/mo

GDN JapanGDN Japan

177,000UU/mo

GotDotNetGotDotNet

450,000UU/mo

MSDN BlogsMSDN Blogs

>16,000 bloggers7,000,000 RSS/mo

ASP.NETASP.NET

4,000,000 PV/mo

NewsgroupsNewsgroups

250,000 UU/mo

Sample of Communities @

CustomersCustomers

>350,000,000

ISV PartnersISV Partners

>65,000

Services PartnersServices Partners

>375,000

Channel 9Channel 9

>390,000 Resellers

Loosely Coupled vs. Tightly CoupledCommercial Development

Loosely Coupled (OSS)

• Technical Model– R&D distributed: Maintainers,

committers, community pyramid Volunteers, corporates

– All with different motives, objectives, ideas, with commonality in project

– Need ‘benevolent dictatorship’– Results distributed to free riders and

participants– Project-specific transparency– Premium placed on standards for

everything – multiparty agreements

• Business Model– Software is secondary/ commodity– Services are the core ‘product’– Original software motives,

accountability, people, difficult to maintain

– Customer insists on project accountability via dependency on services agreements

Tightly Coupled SW

• Technical Model– Central R&D: Program managers,

Development teams, Testers, Communities

– One company management chain– Alignment determined by strength of

management– Results accrue to company– Managed transparency– Standards promote interoperability at

key interfaces

• Business Model– Software is core product– Services are ancillary– Aligned or not by interests of

customers, shareholders, management– Customer insists on project

accountability via self service or commodity services

What’s the point?

Licensing Choices

Licensing Choices

Business Choices

Business Choices

Distribution Choices

Distribution Choices

Development Choices

Development Choices

It’s About ChoiceEach Choice Has Implications

LanguageCommunity

BSD,Shared Source Licenses

Source modelPlatform

Open sourceSharewareFreeware

Traditional commercial licensesGPLPublic domain

ServicesPackaged software

Aggregate “distributions”AppliancesHardware

CommercialA combination of different models

Ask the Questions, Do the Analysis

1. Total Costs2. Total Benefits3. Product Development and Testing process4. Community5. Interoperability, compatibility6. Ecosystem7. Licensing, Indemnification8. Servicing and Patching9. Support, Accountability10. Roadmap for improvement, relevant innovation

Total ValueEquation

Merits not Mandates; Value not Ideology

CommunityCommunity UniqueUniqueBalance The BenefitsBalance The Benefits

Procurement Policy

• Technology leadership

• Merits, not mandates

• Government funded research

• Platform-neutral standards

• Intellectual property protections