Comments on: eWeek thinks SugarCRM will be alone http://www.nicholasgoodman.com/bt/blog/2006/03/08/eweek-thinks-sugarcrm-will-be-alone/ Musings on reporting, OLAP, ETL, open source Tue, 06 Jan 2009 09:20:09 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.5 By: Nicholas Goodman http://www.nicholasgoodman.com/bt/blog/2006/03/08/eweek-thinks-sugarcrm-will-be-alone/#comment-122 Nicholas Goodman Fri, 17 Mar 2006 23:54:56 +0000 http://www.nicholasgoodman.com/bt/blog/?p=142#comment-122 Well... I completely agree. The term "Open Source" means completely different things to different people. To some, it's a way to get exposure and a marketing bump. To others, it means a way to develop software in a community driven way. As the "fast followers" of open source stake their claim, there will certainly be hucksters that will give the whole FOSS thing a bad name. Hopefully the community can help regulate; I fear it though. It will be based on discussions of nuance, philosophy, and perception as much as critia. Wouldn't it be great if there were an "Open Source" compatibility toolkit. Run an open source company through it and see how "compatible" it is. Well… I completely agree. The term “Open Source” means completely different things to different people. To some, it’s a way to get exposure and a marketing bump. To others, it means a way to develop software in a community driven way.

As the “fast followers” of open source stake their claim, there will certainly be hucksters that will give the whole FOSS thing a bad name. Hopefully the community can help regulate; I fear it though. It will be based on discussions of nuance, philosophy, and perception as much as critia.

Wouldn’t it be great if there were an “Open Source” compatibility toolkit. Run an open source company through it and see how “compatible” it is.

]]> By: mark http://www.nicholasgoodman.com/bt/blog/2006/03/08/eweek-thinks-sugarcrm-will-be-alone/#comment-121 mark Fri, 17 Mar 2006 23:24:02 +0000 http://www.nicholasgoodman.com/bt/blog/?p=142#comment-121 You brought something to my attention that I didn't realize. I didn't read into their licensing so I didn't pick up theat they aren't open source. I think this is a bigger problem as the open source hype catches on in more and more mainstream media. Companies are using "open source" as marketing, and corrupting the term. My concernt with this problem is that it will dilute the open source projects out there and eventually remove any meaning from the term. We'll be back to have to read through license agreements and contracts to fgure out what is/isn't and therefore what to expect. Let's hope that the most common licenses become standardized enough that they are adopted more broadly (e.g. GPL 3, etc.) You brought something to my attention that I didn’t realize. I didn’t read into their licensing so I didn’t pick up theat they aren’t open source.

I think this is a bigger problem as the open source hype catches on in more and more mainstream media. Companies are using “open source” as marketing, and corrupting the term.

My concernt with this problem is that it will dilute the open source projects out there and eventually remove any meaning from the term. We’ll be back to have to read through license agreements and contracts to fgure out what is/isn’t and therefore what to expect. Let’s hope that the most common licenses become standardized enough that they are adopted more broadly (e.g. GPL 3, etc.)

]]>