December 13, 2005
In one of
the few quiet moments this week, I found
myself recalling a recent discussion with a colleague about a certain
proprietary software vendor.Our discussion centered on the incredible
level of loyalty this particular vendor has been able to create among
its employees and clients.It has reached a point, in our opinion,
where these people actually believe that GIS begins and ends with their
software.They seem blinded by the light, and are closed to any other
vendor's solutions, or approaches to GIS projects that did not include
their software.
Wow.How can these people be so blind? After all, shouldn't a
professional be open to all possible solutions in order to find the
right solution? Is that not the basic tenet of successful business?
I made the decision years ago to take a different path when I opened my
mind to open source software.To those who felt their software vendor
was omnipotent, I was committing professional suicide.To me, it was
simply an option that offered a business model that proprietary
software companies did not offer.During the first several months, I
met many people in the open source community.They loved their work,
collaborated with each other between countries and continents, and
respected each other.My impression was that they knew something the
others did not - that GIS was not about the software, but about the use
of spatial technologies to solve problems.Was I in heaven?
But then"¦ This past week witnessed one of the largest events in the
history of open source GIS software, if not the entire GIS industry.
The mighty Autodesk stepped up to the plate and released its latest
edition of MapGuide to the world as open source (Boom! Did you hear
that?!).
To those of you who might not understand the potential impact of this
event, this is a big deal.The announcement took place in Orlando,
Florida at Autodesk University (read Adena Schutzberg's article
on the announcement).Autodesk reports that 60 person-years went into
the development of this release (they probably count lunch, commutes,
conferences and that coder named Billy who no one has ever met but
everyone speaks of fondly).Regardless of the actual number of hours,
no one can challenge the fact that this release is big.
Since the open source community is "open," you would expect this week
to be full of healthy discussions about the future, the possibilities
this new addition to the community might offer, and the challenges that
are ahead in learning about a new platform.Instead, we're talking a
lot about this corporate giant who has just walked into our living
room, sat down on our couch, and started eating our Cheetos.How will
we work with this giant? Is this giant friendly? Just how smart is this
giant? What are this giant's likes and dislikes (besides our Cheetos)?
To the open-minded people of the open source community, you'd expect to
see dozens, if not hundreds of interesting discussion topics, each one
ripe with excitement "¦ literally bursting with energy.
Yes, we got energy, all right.It began with a trickle of e-mails on
that first day of Autodesk's announcement, followed by a few hundred
e-mails and off-line discussions over the following days.Members of
the open source community were angry.The feelings of betrayal and
sense of takeover were palpable.It was "¦ surprising.But why?
There are legitimate reasons for this negative response.To understand,
we must summarize the events that led up to the "big news" on November
28.It seems that more than a year before the announcement, Autodesk
began to explore the possibility of open source as a component of its
business.Its exploration led it to MapServer, a leading open source
Internet mapping platform originally developed at the University of
Minnesota.They met several members of the MapServer community,
including the original author, prominent core software developers, and
several respected members of the MapServer community who had spent
countless hours contributing to the success of the software.Over the
weeks that followed, Autodesk apparently became enamored with the
MapServer community, and decided to intensify the discussions and get
serious.
To do so, the company needed to create a closed forum, subject to
non-disclosure agreements (NDAs), so that the idea of contributing to
open source would not become public prematurely.This makes sense for a
public company in a competitive market.Therefore, the original author
of MapServer, representatives of the University of Minnesota, and
several members of the MapServer community signed NDAs and began the
work of making this idea reality.In the end, it was decided that a new
foundation would be formed to provide a home for both MapServer and
MapGuide.This new foundation would provide a legal entity within which
these two communities could come together and collaborate.It was also
decided that MapGuide would be renamed MapServer Enterprise.So as not
to be left out, the original MapServer would be renamed MapServer
Cheetah.
To complete the deal, a letter of commitment was signed by all
involved, including Autodesk representatives and those members of the
MapServer community under the NDA agreements.And alas "¦ a new
collaborative effort was born on November 28th, 2005.The baby weighed
8 lbs.4 oz., but landed like a ball of lead.
Here's the core issue: Those who signed the letter on behalf of the
MapServer Community did not own the software they were representing and
they operated in secrecy.To some in the MapServer Community (estimated
to be several thousand people), this did not feel right.Last Monday's
announcement came as a shock to 99% of those who have been using
MapServer for years.Having been a part of an open source community,
where ideas are shared more freely and more often than dinner rolls at
supper on Walton's Mountain, this event did not pass the straight face
test.Some members felt betrayed.
Of course, other issues would surface as well, such as the new software
names.Certainly the MapServer they all loved so much could not be
relegated to the role of "Cheetah," while MapGuide was granted the
title MapServer Enterprise.In these discussions, Autodesk was accused
of taking advantage of the MapServer "brand" and stealing the momentum
that MapServer had gained over the past few years.Members of the
MapServer Community also worried that the term "Enterprise" might
indicate Autodesk's software to be superior to their valued MapServer
Cheetah, which to these members of the MapServer Community, was not
possible.[Since this article was written Autodesk has decided
to change the product name.""Ed.]
And then it struck me.
My beloved open source community was not immune to the effects of brand
loyalty after all.The defensiveness of some of its members demands an
appreciation for their devotion to the MapServer Community.For many of
these folks, the decision to work with open source was not an easy one.
For all of these folks, there have been countless hours of work in the
trenches solving problems with spatial technology.But not just any
spatial technology - their beloved MapServer.
So, maybe I was too hard on all of those folks who are so devoted to
their proprietary software.And, maybe I should not have been so
surprised at this week's activity on the MapServer listserv.We are all
subject to loyalty and the blinders loyalty can place on you.When you
spend a third of each day (at a minimum) focused on a software platform
that supports the bulk of your work, you tend to be defensive when an
outsider arrives, whatever their intentions.It takes time to get used
to it.
In fact, it appears that as the days go by, the MapServer Community is
gaining an appreciation for the possibilities the new Foundation and
their new partner offer.Hopefully, the new Foundation can dig in and
get to the business at hand.
To help ease the pain, allow me to offer the MapServer Community some
points to ponder.First, keep in mind that the people at Autodesk who
signed that letter did so in secrecy as well.Most people within the
Autodesk organization did not know what was happening either.Based on
my contacts in Florida, these same people are very excited about the
possibilities the new foundation offers.They are curious about open
source, the MapServer Community, and the communication model that is so
central to open source organizations.Imagine that - they are curious
about us!
Second, the people who helped make the Foundation happen on behalf of
the MapServer Community did not seek out Autodesk.Autodesk came to
them.Once the idea was on the table, these people did what they felt
was right.There was no precedent for them to work from; this event
represents the first of its kind.Allow me to say that again: this
event represents the first of its kind.Conversations with several of
them have convinced me that their intentions were pure and they truly
believe that Autodesk has the best intentions as well.The MapServer
Community has put its trust in these people for years, basing its work
on the code that many of them write, so I believe a little faith is
warranted.
And third, this event was inevitable.Sooner or later, some major
player was going to learn enough about the open source community to
realize how much it has to offer the GIS industry, and the MapServer
Community was an obvious first stop.Therefore, it was only a matter of
time before one of them would take the boldest of moves and break
ranks.Autodesk has made that move, and we owe the company the
opportunity to hold up its end of the bargain and become a valued
partner.Sure, there are a lot of questions pertaining to Autodesk's
motives, goals and plans.But these questions will be answered in time.
We should give Autodesk enough leeway to prove itself.I believe the
company has earned that, given the fact that it was the first to make
such a bold move.
And to our new friends at Autodesk, be warned.Open community might
not, in all cases, be open minded on all things MapServer.But we are
good people, so be patient.You will find in our midst some of the
toughest software people in the business.These folks will stretch your
software in directions you never intended just to see if it breaks.And
it will break.But in the coming months, your software will also
improve, and our industry will be the better for it.
To all of you, I cannot stress enough the importance of not taking our
eyes off the ball.While I may excuse our loyalty to our software, I
cannot justify it.MapServer, MapServer Cheetah, or whatever we might
call it, is not the Holy Grail.There will always be other software to
consider, another partner to work with, another option to experience,
and another problem to solve.It is all about development in an open
environment.Let's not forget that.
I suggest we meet Autodesk half way, and help define a foundation that
protects and provides for all our goals and interests.I think we
should assume Autodesk is truly excited about the opportunity to work
with the open source community.What if November 28th is the day we all
look back on as the day things changed for open source ...for the
better?
To borrow the words of Flavio Hendry, one of my favorite MapServer
listserv members from the great country of Switzerland; "what's about
having a cool beer and just relax and see what happens"¦"
Good advice from the land of peace.
|
Your Comments Post a comment All comments provided in this section are those of the individual who has created the post. These are not the opinions of Directions Media, its editors, staff or owners unless otherwise noted. Directions Media retains the right to edit or delete any comments posted herein.
|
|
||||||
| Autodesk just GAVE away a huge amount of code that they have invested a large amount of time into creating. I heard a figure of 60 man years of effort to date. So, to those opposed to Autodesk stepping into the MapServer camp, please don't forget that this software (and very good software at that) has been handed to you (the general GIS community) to do with what you want and at no expense to you. Remember, Autodesk has legally signed away all rights to this software and it is now in the hands of the open source foundation. For those wondering what Autodesk's motives are, I think they realized they needed to make a big splash to continue to be recognized in the GIS industry and this was a good way to do that. I think they have accomplished that goal....... |
||||||
|
||||||
| My 2 Deutsche: A good article, but your introduction took me back and made me very skeptical about the points you are trying to make. "incredible level of loyalty this particular vendor has been able to create among its employees and clients." Could this have anything to do with that vendor having a good grasp of user needs or and attitude of genuine interest in helping people, without needing to make a buck every time? If not, and they truly have people brainwashed, why attack them and call their customers and employees 'blind'? Why not just spout the virtues of open source options? Why belittle the choices people have made, just because they are not yours? It is possible to make your point without 'attacking' and 'denigrating' people. It is also possible to promote open source without the 'closed source' is bad mentality. I tend to dismiss arguments where they are bolstered with negative remarks that have no place other than to create drama. Besides, it is hard to convince people something is better by telling them what they have now is bad - it makes they feel very stupid and like they made a poor choice. Even if they did, why not just 'enlighten' them and offer them the chance to enter your world without them being forced to be on the defensive? |
||||||
|
||||||
| I am not sure if you are making a point based on the article, or creating a point on your own? The article clearly indicates that followers of proprietary software and open source software can suffer from the same illness.....ie. total loyalty that can limit their possibilities. Did you read the entire article? I agree with you that belittlement, attacks, denigration, dismissiveness, and negative remarks are not good ways to present perspectives....which is why I avoided such approaches. Are you sure you read the entire article? With an open mind? |
||||||
|
||||||
| I personally use what ever software suits me better because it is reliable, fast and I know how to do things on it. With Autodesk entering the community and creating 2 kind of Mapservers some questions may arise... which should I choose? why create 2 Mapservers? is one better than the other? As far as I've read MSE is based in MapGuide and it is different from the orignal Mapserver. So why the need of creating an Enterprise version? I hope that when you said 'give time to Autodesk' is not give an opportunity to take over the MS name to get the position in the market that MapGuide never had. |
||||||
|
||||||
| It is confusing with Autodesk's software contribution to the foundation being branded MapServer Enterprise and the original now being called MapServer Cheetah. The two are completely different and don't share any code at the moment. Due to other opposition on the MapServer listserv's of Autodesk using the name, Autodesk has stated that they are considering changing the name (there is mention of this in the article above with a link). Another side note: MapServer Enterprise (or Tux, or whatever the new name will be) is not based on the older MapGuide technology. It is completely new sofware with all new web-tier architecture. |
||||||

