<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: On Open Source, Declarative Living and Making Better Platform Decisions.</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.redmonk.com/jgovernor/2006/02/21/on-open-source-declarative-living-and-making-better-platform-decisions/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.redmonk.com/jgovernor/2006/02/21/on-open-source-declarative-living-and-making-better-platform-decisions/</link>
	<description>An industry analyst blog looking at software ecosystems and convergence</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 03 Feb 2012 10:35:40 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: People Over Process</title>
		<link>http://www.redmonk.com/jgovernor/2006/02/21/on-open-source-declarative-living-and-making-better-platform-decisions/comment-page-1/#comment-1180</link>
		<dc:creator>People Over Process</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Mar 2006 06:34:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.redmonk.com/jgovernor/wp/?p=515#comment-1180</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;Enterprise Agile: Training and Building Common Understanding&lt;/strong&gt;

In reading Scott&#039;s reply to the Enterprise Agile post, I got to thinking: how much training do you need? In this area, training serve two purposes in my mind: the education everyone on the topic. to give everyone a shared...
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Enterprise Agile: Training and Building Common Understanding</strong></p>
<p>In reading Scott&#8217;s reply to the Enterprise Agile post, I got to thinking: how much training do you need? In this area, training serve two purposes in my mind: the education everyone on the topic. to give everyone a shared&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: tecosystems</title>
		<link>http://www.redmonk.com/jgovernor/2006/02/21/on-open-source-declarative-living-and-making-better-platform-decisions/comment-page-1/#comment-1179</link>
		<dc:creator>tecosystems</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 04 Mar 2006 07:13:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.redmonk.com/jgovernor/wp/?p=515#comment-1179</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;Free Code != No Barriers to Entry&lt;/strong&gt;

One of the things I&#039;m increasingly coming to understand concerning the &quot;Barriers to Entry&quot; meme that we continue to propagate around here is that it&#039;s an intrinsically multi-layered issue, and one that depends heavily on context. I&#039;ve been keenly aware...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Free Code != No Barriers to Entry</strong></p>
<p>One of the things I&#8217;m increasingly coming to understand concerning the &#8220;Barriers to Entry&#8221; meme that we continue to propagate around here is that it&#8217;s an intrinsically multi-layered issue, and one that depends heavily on context. I&#8217;ve been keenly aware&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: James</title>
		<link>http://www.redmonk.com/jgovernor/2006/02/21/on-open-source-declarative-living-and-making-better-platform-decisions/comment-page-1/#comment-1178</link>
		<dc:creator>James</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Mar 2006 18:33:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.redmonk.com/jgovernor/wp/?p=515#comment-1178</guid>
		<description>Hmmm. James you know very well that we would be more than willing to tell others what software we run and even how it performs but the constraint is not the large enterprise but the small software company who doesn&#039;t want their benchmark information floating around in the blogosphere unmanaged.

If you could convince your software vendor clients to allow us to be more open, then we will be more willing to share...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hmmm. James you know very well that we would be more than willing to tell others what software we run and even how it performs but the constraint is not the large enterprise but the small software company who doesn&#8217;t want their benchmark information floating around in the blogosphere unmanaged.</p>
<p>If you could convince your software vendor clients to allow us to be more open, then we will be more willing to share&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Robb</title>
		<link>http://www.redmonk.com/jgovernor/2006/02/21/on-open-source-declarative-living-and-making-better-platform-decisions/comment-page-1/#comment-1177</link>
		<dc:creator>John Robb</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Feb 2006 08:53:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.redmonk.com/jgovernor/wp/?p=515#comment-1177</guid>
		<description>James-

Great post.  Clearly, transparency is a core value of Zimbra and it makes it a lot easier for technology partners, customers and channel partners to know what we are up to and how they can get involved.  I love the idea of encouraging transparency of vendors and IT choices.  It makes it easier for partners and vendors to know how to add value for an organization.  For example, if people know that a company is using Salesforce or Web Side Story it is easier for partners and vendors to make very specific recommendations to help the company maximize the value of their investment.

-jr</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>James-</p>
<p>Great post.  Clearly, transparency is a core value of Zimbra and it makes it a lot easier for technology partners, customers and channel partners to know what we are up to and how they can get involved.  I love the idea of encouraging transparency of vendors and IT choices.  It makes it easier for partners and vendors to know how to add value for an organization.  For example, if people know that a company is using Salesforce or Web Side Story it is easier for partners and vendors to make very specific recommendations to help the company maximize the value of their investment.</p>
<p>-jr</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Scott Mark</title>
		<link>http://www.redmonk.com/jgovernor/2006/02/21/on-open-source-declarative-living-and-making-better-platform-decisions/comment-page-1/#comment-1176</link>
		<dc:creator>Scott Mark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 Feb 2006 21:45:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.redmonk.com/jgovernor/wp/?p=515#comment-1176</guid>
		<description>James, what are you on acid or something?  ;-)

I think you are spot on in theory, but the practice of this will be a long time coming... individuals are still catching up on the declarative notions, and I think large enterprises are far behind.  Many regard their IT portfolio as a competitive advantage in terms of software assets - they really should regard their IT people, processes, and culture as the advantage but there are yet a lot of managers to convince of that fact.

I think you are dead on though about the advantages in terms of starting to get more accurate metrics around use of open source, and companies (even competitors) should see the advantages of being able to collaborate (even collude) to have vendors cater better to their industry needs.  There are some obvious cases like compliance...

But I do think enterprises are open to disclosing these if only semi-publicly to analyst firms in exchange for market analysis.  This isn&#039;t quite the public declaration you are asking for, but would start to open the doors.  You are also correct that holding these cards close is part of what lets the big firms control information - it&#039;s a competitive disadvantage to have to depend on their opinions to make platform decisions.

You also know you are doing something right if you cause controversy!  Nice post</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>James, what are you on acid or something?  <img src='http://www.redmonk.com/jgovernor/wp/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>I think you are spot on in theory, but the practice of this will be a long time coming&#8230; individuals are still catching up on the declarative notions, and I think large enterprises are far behind.  Many regard their IT portfolio as a competitive advantage in terms of software assets &#8211; they really should regard their IT people, processes, and culture as the advantage but there are yet a lot of managers to convince of that fact.</p>
<p>I think you are dead on though about the advantages in terms of starting to get more accurate metrics around use of open source, and companies (even competitors) should see the advantages of being able to collaborate (even collude) to have vendors cater better to their industry needs.  There are some obvious cases like compliance&#8230;</p>
<p>But I do think enterprises are open to disclosing these if only semi-publicly to analyst firms in exchange for market analysis.  This isn&#8217;t quite the public declaration you are asking for, but would start to open the doors.  You are also correct that holding these cards close is part of what lets the big firms control information &#8211; it&#8217;s a competitive disadvantage to have to depend on their opinions to make platform decisions.</p>
<p>You also know you are doing something right if you cause controversy!  Nice post</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Byron</title>
		<link>http://www.redmonk.com/jgovernor/2006/02/21/on-open-source-declarative-living-and-making-better-platform-decisions/comment-page-1/#comment-1175</link>
		<dc:creator>Byron</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 Feb 2006 01:37:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.redmonk.com/jgovernor/wp/?p=515#comment-1175</guid>
		<description>i enjoyed the post. some reactions - 

 - one way we talk about this is that being an &quot;open source&quot; company is about more than the license. that&#039;s a big part of what our 6 promises are all about - &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.sourcelabs.com/?page=company&amp;sub=customerpromise&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://www.sourcelabs.com/?page=company&amp;sub=customerpromise&lt;/a&gt;
transparency is a key attribute for an open source company. another way to put it is that customers don&#039;t want any &quot;hidden surprises&quot; and that&#039;s one reason why they are willing to do business with small open source startups. 

 - one way in which we&#039;re helping to lead is opening up tests and test results. it seems pretty drop-dead obvious that that&#039;s the right thing to do, both for the customer as well as for the vendor. 

 - i like what you say about SOx for software. we haven&#039;t put it that explicitly, and i like it. 

 - on your piece about &quot;competitive advantage&quot; - i think it&#039;s important to note that more generally competitive advantage in a world based on recurring subscription revenue is becoming more and more about ongoing value delivered to customers, and obviously a key element to that are things like trust. &quot;declarative living&quot; makes a ton of sense in that world, much more so than in the world of &quot;hit and run&quot; multi-million dollar deals that we used to live in (and some vendors still do).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>i enjoyed the post. some reactions &#8211; </p>
<p> &#8211; one way we talk about this is that being an &#8220;open source&#8221; company is about more than the license. that&#8217;s a big part of what our 6 promises are all about &#8211; <a href="http://www.sourcelabs.com/?page=company&amp;sub=customerpromise" rel="nofollow">http://www.sourcelabs.com/?page=company&#038;sub=customerpromise</a><br />
transparency is a key attribute for an open source company. another way to put it is that customers don&#8217;t want any &#8220;hidden surprises&#8221; and that&#8217;s one reason why they are willing to do business with small open source startups. </p>
<p> &#8211; one way in which we&#8217;re helping to lead is opening up tests and test results. it seems pretty drop-dead obvious that that&#8217;s the right thing to do, both for the customer as well as for the vendor. </p>
<p> &#8211; i like what you say about SOx for software. we haven&#8217;t put it that explicitly, and i like it. </p>
<p> &#8211; on your piece about &#8220;competitive advantage&#8221; &#8211; i think it&#8217;s important to note that more generally competitive advantage in a world based on recurring subscription revenue is becoming more and more about ongoing value delivered to customers, and obviously a key element to that are things like trust. &#8220;declarative living&#8221; makes a ton of sense in that world, much more so than in the world of &#8220;hit and run&#8221; multi-million dollar deals that we used to live in (and some vendors still do).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: james governor</title>
		<link>http://www.redmonk.com/jgovernor/2006/02/21/on-open-source-declarative-living-and-making-better-platform-decisions/comment-page-1/#comment-1174</link>
		<dc:creator>james governor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Feb 2006 18:49:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.redmonk.com/jgovernor/wp/?p=515#comment-1174</guid>
		<description>what would we offer them? the possibilties are endless. free short consults for members perhaps. shared IP - things like the compliance oriented architetecture. we&#039;re already doing a lot of sharing.

offer the enterprise something of value - jesus christ if they could cut the Gartner budget by 10% and make more informed platform decisions - wouldnt that be value? 

i am flabberghasted to have a couple of people ask what the value would be. you think the status quo is proving value? you think enterprises dont waste billions of dollars a year on procurement decisions? you think large vendors dont win against small vendors by buying off &quot;independent consultants&quot;.... what am I, in some weird alternative universe where we like to get screwed by people?

the best analog is commercial software - i defy ANYONE to tell me that open source software hasnt created massive advantages in technology deployment - even for 100% windows shops.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>what would we offer them? the possibilties are endless. free short consults for members perhaps. shared IP &#8211; things like the compliance oriented architetecture. we&#8217;re already doing a lot of sharing.</p>
<p>offer the enterprise something of value &#8211; jesus christ if they could cut the Gartner budget by 10% and make more informed platform decisions &#8211; wouldnt that be value? </p>
<p>i am flabberghasted to have a couple of people ask what the value would be. you think the status quo is proving value? you think enterprises dont waste billions of dollars a year on procurement decisions? you think large vendors dont win against small vendors by buying off &#8220;independent consultants&#8221;&#8230;. what am I, in some weird alternative universe where we like to get screwed by people?</p>
<p>the best analog is commercial software &#8211; i defy ANYONE to tell me that open source software hasnt created massive advantages in technology deployment &#8211; even for 100% windows shops.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Neil Ward-Dutton</title>
		<link>http://www.redmonk.com/jgovernor/2006/02/21/on-open-source-declarative-living-and-making-better-platform-decisions/comment-page-1/#comment-1173</link>
		<dc:creator>Neil Ward-Dutton</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Feb 2006 00:42:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.redmonk.com/jgovernor/wp/?p=515#comment-1173</guid>
		<description>Interesting stuff James. When I was doing management and strategy stuff at Ovum, one of your clients approached me (and colleagues) to ask if we could help to create some kind of collaborative survey platform which could be shipped out to enterprises, in order to enable them (and other vendors) to get market data without having to work with IDC&#039;s numbers. So I suspect there&#039;s definitely something in what you say - although I think there are some wrinkles. For example, what you suggest would definitely make your job easier! which is nice ;-) But I think you&#039;d have to offer enterprises something of value in exchange for the info you&#039;re talking about. You give the &quot;participation age&quot; response, but given enterprises&#039; reticence to lower the barriers I think getting the ball rolling would have to about more than just community spirit. What would you offer them?

Though why listen to me - the MWD blog runs on blogger ;-)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting stuff James. When I was doing management and strategy stuff at Ovum, one of your clients approached me (and colleagues) to ask if we could help to create some kind of collaborative survey platform which could be shipped out to enterprises, in order to enable them (and other vendors) to get market data without having to work with IDC&#8217;s numbers. So I suspect there&#8217;s definitely something in what you say &#8211; although I think there are some wrinkles. For example, what you suggest would definitely make your job easier! which is nice <img src='http://www.redmonk.com/jgovernor/wp/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';-)' class='wp-smiley' />  But I think you&#8217;d have to offer enterprises something of value in exchange for the info you&#8217;re talking about. You give the &#8220;participation age&#8221; response, but given enterprises&#8217; reticence to lower the barriers I think getting the ball rolling would have to about more than just community spirit. What would you offer them?</p>
<p>Though why listen to me &#8211; the MWD blog runs on blogger <img src='http://www.redmonk.com/jgovernor/wp/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

