web-archive-it.com » IT » C » CONECTA.IT

Total: 359

Choose link from "Titles, links and description words view":

Or switch to "Titles and links view".
  • A brief research summary « carlodaffara.conecta.itcarlodaffara.conecta.it
    advantages of most OSS projects with two examples mentioned Zimbra and Alfresco and the added advantage for partners that can synchronize their work with that of the OSS community The dynamics of OSS adoptions II diffusion processes A presentation of diffusion processes as one of the models in OSS adoption and a presentation of the UTAUT model for estimating the degree of acceptance of OSS From theory to practice the personal desktop linux experiment A long example on how to apply the previously discussed models in a theoretical exercise creating an end user large scale linux PC for personal activities The post was inspired by work done during the Manila workshop along with UN s International Open Source Network for facilitating take up of open source by south east Asean SMEs Rethinking OSS business model classifications by adding adopters value A presentation of the new classification of OSS business models I have to thank Matthew Aslett of the 451 group for the many comments and for accepting to share his work from the CAOS report with us Comparing companies effectiveness a response to Savio Rodrigues A post written in response to work by Savio Rodrigues on the relative shares of R D of OSS companies compared to traditional IT companies Our definitions of OSS based business models A follow up of the rethinking post it outlines the new definitions of OSS business models created for the final part of the FLOSSMETRICS project Another take on the financial value of open source Our estimates of the value of the open source software market and a call for further research on non code contributions OSS based business models a revised study based on 218 companies A post providing the summary of the extended FLOSSMETRICS study on open source companies that increased its number from 80 to 218 with some observation on relative size and usage of the various models Estimating savings from OSS code reuse or where does the money comes from One of my favourite posts provides a long discussion of the savings obtained when using OSS inside of other products with some additional data obtained through COCOMO modeling Another data point on OSS efficiency A short post focusing on data from the italian TEDIS research that showed how OSS companies are on average more capable to take on larger customers when compared with benchmark IT companies of the same size The new FLOSSMETRICS project liveliness parameters Fresh from the other project researchers I provided a list of the new project liveness parameters that will be used in the SME guide Reliability of open source from a software engineering point of view A post that presents some results on how open source tends to be of higher quality under specific circumstances and a follow up idea on how this may be due to basic software engineering facts related to component reuse Open source and certified systems A post inspired by a recent white paper on e voting the post presents my

    Original URL path: http://carlodaffara.conecta.it/a-brief-research-summary/index.html (2016-02-18)
    Open archived version from archive


  • Open source and certified systems « carlodaffara.conecta.itcarlodaffara.conecta.it
    be found through Google The result is that in any jurisdiction that uses the default keys rather than creating new ones the digital signatures provide no protection at all No use of high assurance development methods The AccuBasic interpreter does not appear to have been written using high assurance development methodologies It seems to have been written according to ordinary commercial practices Clearly there are serious security flaws in current state of the AV OS and AV TSx software source Security Analysis of the Diebold AccuBasic Interpreter Wagner Jefferson Bishop Of course there are many other reports and news pieces on the general unreliability of the certified GEMS software just to pick the most talked about component The fact is that assurance and certification is a non functional aspect that is unrelated to the license the software is released with as certifications of software quality and adherence to high integrity standards are based on design documents the adherence to development standards testing procedures and much more but not licensing I have already written about our research on open source quality from the software engineering point of view and in general it can be observed that open source development models tend to have an higher improvement in quality within a specific time frame when compared to proprietary software systems under specific circumstances like a healthy contributor community It is possible to certify open source systems under the strictest certification rules like the SABI secret and below certification medical CCHIT encryption FIPS standard common criteria Evaluation Assurance Level EAL4 and in one case meet or exceed EAL5 civil engineering where the product is used for the stability computations for EDF nuclear plants designs avionics and ground based high integrity systems like air traffic control and railrway systems we explored the procedures for achieving certified status for pre existing open source code in the CALIBRE project Thus it is possible to meet and exceed the regulatory rules for a wide spectrum of environments with far more stringent specifications than the current e voting environment It seems that the real problem lies in the potential for competition from OSS voting systems over proprietary ones Legislators who adopt policies that require open source products or offer incentives to open source providers will likely fall victim to a perception of instituting unfair market practices At worst policy makers may find themselves encouraging the use of products that do not exist and market conditions that cannot support competition The reality is that there are some open source voting software the white paper even lists some and the real threat is the government to start funding those projects instead of buying proprietary combinations This is where the vendors clearly show the underlying misunderstanding on how open source works you can still sell your assembly of hardware and software as with EAL it is the combination of both that is certified not the software in isolation and continue the current business model It is doubtful that the open source

    Original URL path: http://carlodaffara.conecta.it/open-source-and-certified-systems/index.html (2016-02-18)
    Open archived version from archive

  • MXM, patents and licenses: clarity is all it takes « carlodaffara.conecta.itcarlodaffara.conecta.it
    believes that an open source implementation may receive external effort much like the traditional open source projects and thus reduce maintenance and extension effort If this is the aim then the probability of having this kind of external support is quite low as companies would avoid it as the license would not allow in any case a commercial use with an associated patent license and researchers working in the area would have been perfectly satisfied with any kind of academic or research only license the group wants to increase the adoption of the standard and the reference implementation should be used as a basis for further work to turn it into a commercial product This falls in the same cathegory as before why should I look at the reference implementation if it does not grant me any potential use The group could have simply published the source code for the reference and said if you want to use it you should pay us a license for the embedded patents the group wants to have a golden standard to benchmark external implementations for example to see that the bitstreams are compliant Again there is no need for having an open source license The reality is that there is no clear motivation behind making this under an open source license because the clear presence of patents on the implementation makes it risky or non free to use for any commercial exploitation Microsoft for example did it much better to avoid losing their rights to enforce their patents they paid or supported other companies to create a patent covered software and released it under an open source license Since the secondary companies do not hold any patent with the releasing of the code they are not relieving any threat from the original Microsoft IPR and at the same time they use a perfectly acceptable OSI approved license As the purpose of the group is twofold increase adoption of the standards make commercial user pay for the IPR licensing I would propose a different alternative since the real purpose is to get paid for the patents or to be able to enforce them in case of commercial competitors why don t you dual license it with the strongest copyleft license available at the moment the AGPL This way any competitor would be forced to be fully AGPL and so any improvement would have to be shared exchanging the lost licensing revenue for the maintenance cost reduction or to pay for the license turning everything into the traditional IPR licensing scheme I know I know this is wishful thinking Carlo I understand your difficult role This entry was posted on Friday April 10th 2009 8 51 am and is filed under OSS business models OSS data blog You can follow any responses to this entry through RSS 2 0 You can leave a response or trackback from your own site Comments 2 Trackbacks 0 1 by Carlo Piana April 10th 2009 at 09 38 Thank

    Original URL path: http://carlodaffara.conecta.it/mxm-patents-and-licenses-clarity-is-all-it-takes/index.html (2016-02-18)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Another hypocrite post: "Open Source After 'Jacobsen v. Katzer'" « carlodaffara.conecta.itcarlodaffara.conecta.it
    software developers should be even more cautious of incorporating any open source code in their offerings Potentially far greater monetary remedies not to mention continued availability of equitable relief make this vehicle one train to board with caution Let s skip the fact that the law practitioners that wrote this jewel of law journalism are part of the firm White Case that represented Microsoft in the EU Commission s first antitrust action let s skip the fact that terms like infection and the liberal use of commercial hides the same error already presented in other pearls of legal wisdom already debated here the reality is that the entire frame of reference is based on an assumption that I heard the first time from a lawyer working for a quite large firm that since open source software is free companies are entitled to do whatever they want with it Of course it s a simplification I know many lawyers and paralegals that are incredibly smart Carlo Piana comes to mind but to this people I propose the following gedankenexperiment imagine that within the text of the linked article every mention to open source was magically replaced with proprietary source code The federal circuit ruling would more or less stay unmodified but the comment of the writers would assume quite hysterical properties Because they would argue that proprietary software is extremely dangerous because if Microsoft just as an example found parts of its source code included inside of another product they would sue the hell out of the poor developer that would be unable to use the Cisco defence to claim that Open Source crept into its products and thus damages should be minimal The reality is that the entire article is written with a focus that is non differentiating in this sense there is no difference between OSS and proprietary code Exactly like for proprietary software taking open source code without respecting the license is not allowed the RIAA would say that it is stealing and that the company is a pirate So dear customers of White Case stay away from open source at all costs while we will continue to reap its benefits This entry was posted on Wednesday April 8th 2009 1 19 pm and is filed under OSS business models OSS data divertissements You can follow any responses to this entry through RSS 2 0 You can leave a response or trackback from your own site Comments 5 Trackbacks 0 1 by Roy Schestowitz April 8th 2009 at 18 24 The article was published by Microsoft puppets Quote 2 by cdaffara April 9th 2009 at 07 49 I know but I have not stressed that point because I found lots of law practitioner that share the same attitude Quote 3 by jdk April 11th 2009 at 21 28 Dude all they re saying in the article is that you need to use caution when incorporating open source code because of a recent decision by a federal court That

    Original URL path: http://carlodaffara.conecta.it/another-hypocrite-post-open-source-after-jacobsen-v-katzer/index.html (2016-02-18)
    Open archived version from archive

  • See you in Brussels: the European OpenClinica meeting « carlodaffara.conecta.itcarlodaffara.conecta.it
    be in Brussels that night for a chat and a Belgian beer As for those that are not aware of OpenClinica it is a shining example of open source software for health care it is a Java based server system that allows to create secure web forms for clinical data acquisition and much more The OpenClinica software platform supports clinical data submission validation and annotation data filtering and extraction study auditing de identification of Protected Health Information PHI and much more It is distributed under the LGPL and does have some really nice features like the design of forms using spreadsheets extremely intuitive We have used it in several regional and national trials and even trialed it as a mobile data acquisition platform If you can t be in Brussels but are interested in open source health care check out OpenClinica This entry was posted on Wednesday April 8th 2009 10 09 am and is filed under OSS business models OSS data blog You can follow any responses to this entry through RSS 2 0 You can leave a response or trackback from your own site Comments 2 Trackbacks 0 1 by Kris Buytaert April 8th 2009 at 14 34 Any detailed plans yet Not sure if I can make it to BXL on tuesday but it would sure be interresting to meet you Where about is the conf your hotel Quote 2 by cdaffara April 8th 2009 at 15 49 For all that are interested the conference is at Bedford hotel http www hotelbedford be near the Grand Place Quote Cancel Reply Name required E Mail required will not be published Website Submit Comment No trackbacks yet blog divertissements EveryDesk OSS adoption OSS business models OSS data Uncategorized April 2015 M T W T F S S Aug 1

    Original URL path: http://carlodaffara.conecta.it/see-you-in-brussels-the-european-openclinica-meeting/index.html (2016-02-18)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Dissecting words for fun and profit, or how to be a few years too late « carlodaffara.conecta.itcarlodaffara.conecta.it
    implying that someone don t get it because he works as a patent attorney is silly and here the author falls in the same fallacy By the way I know some patent attorneys that perfectly get it along with others that believe that open source software is made by fairies in the forest As I said being member of a class is in itself useless in deciding the truth of a statement I do get it and the reality is that open source software is taking us in a direction that should scare everyone Here the author uses the fallacy of membership discussed before and uses it as a authority power I do get it I am qualified then I am saying the truth And what I am saying is that OSS is dangerous and the fact that anyone else apart from O Dowd that believes that Linux will be infiltrated by terrorists is not perceiving the problem is due to the fact that they are not looking with enough attention Sun Microsystems is struggling to say the least and the reality is that they are always going to struggle because they are an open source company which means that the only thing they can sell is service Sun Microsystems is struggling for a long time now unfortunately I always loved their products Personally I believe that the new CEO is doing quite a turnaround on the company that has languished for a long time on a shrinking highly lucrative market like SGI did in the past but that is better left to financial analysts Anyway their financial results were not that good even before the OSS turnaround imposed by Jonathan Schwartz and so there is no real linking between the two part of the phrase on the contrary the OSS part is growing nicely while the large scale enterprise server part is decreasing fast It also introduces an additional error that is the fact that being OSS means that you can sell only services The author clearly has not read much on OSS business models but he should not worry I would be happy to send some papers on the subject Whenever you sell time earning potential is limited There are only so many hours in the day and only so much you can charge by the hour When you have a product that can be replicated whether it be a device a piece of proprietary software or whatever you have the ability to leverage which simply doesn t exist when you are selling yourself by the hour Of course this is the reality of consulting This however does not stop companies like IBM Global Services Accenture and friends to live off consulting simply by asking very high prices for a day of a specialized consultant Or you can find groups like the 451 or RedMonk that are more efficient and targeted towards special markets So there is a realistic ceiling on the revenue that can be earned by any open source company and that ceiling is much lower than any proprietary software company So assuming that by the hour services is the only OSS business model possible and that the price per hour cannot match that of large consulting firm then there is a revenue ceiling that is lower than that of proprietary software companies The fact that both parts of the phrase are unsustained by arguments makes the conclusion unproven It is also an undeniable truth that the way many if not most service companies compete is by price When service companies try and get you to switch over they will promise to provide the same or better service for a lower price This should be a supporting argument for the fact that OSS companies charge a lower per hour price of competing companies and uses Sun as an example Of course it continues to be an unsupported argument even considering the fact that the author probably never paid a receipt for a Sun consultant or would have discovered that their pricing is in line with the rest of the market The trouble with freeware is that there is no margin on free and while open source solutions are not free the race to asymptotically approach free is on hence why I say the race to zero is in full swing Now the author switches from OSS to freeware to remind us that Open Source is after all free Probably RMS would say at this point free as in free speech not free as in free beer but his ideas would be probably dismissed The use of free here is made to create the appearance of a logical connection between freeware and open source of course the author acqnowledges that OSS is not free but as part of the same family they are participating in the asymptotically approach free race to zero As stated before in a perfect competition the race is not to zero but to the marginal cost so using freeware is a way to imply that this cost is zero as well when the reality is that it is not zero but lower than writing everything from scratch thanks to the reuse opportunity And then we move to something completely different as Monty Python would say Unfortunately many in the patent legal community are engaging in the race to zero as well For example there are patent attorneys and patent agents who advertise online claiming to be able to draft and file a complete patent application for under 3 000 One of the most common ads running provides patent applications for 2 800 and I have seen some agents advertise prices as low as 1 400 for a relatively simple mechanical invention The race to zero is in full swing with respect to patent services aimed at independent inventors and start up companies It is also being pushed by major companies who want large law firms to provide patent services for fees ranging from

    Original URL path: http://carlodaffara.conecta.it/dissecting-words-for-fun-and-profit-or-how-to-be-a-few-years-too-late/index.html (2016-02-18)
    Open archived version from archive

  • April 2009 Archives « carlodaffara.conecta.itcarlodaffara.conecta.it
    shows an increase in the number of people coming to the project Yellow The balance is equal to 0 Red The balance shows an increase in the number of people leaving the project Black The balance shows a really high number of people leaving the project CM SRA 7 Average age of people working on a project This metric is focused on the average of years worked by each developer With this approximation we are able to know of members are approaching this limit and we can estimate future effort needs Green The longevity is older than 3 years Yellow The longevity is older than 2 years and younger than 3 years Red The longevity is older than 1 year and younger than 2 years Black The longevity is younger than 1 year CM SRA 8 Evolution of people who contribute to the source code and reporting bugs A way to retrieve this data is to analyze those committers and reporters with the same nickname Taking into account the slope of the resultant line y mx b while measuring the aggregated number and periods of one year Green if m 0 Yellow if m 0 Red if m 0 Black if there are no new submitters for several periods CM SRA 9 Same metric than above but this is the sum of all of them and not the evolution General number We can measure the size of a community Taking into account the slope of the resultant line y mx b while measuring the aggregated number and periods of one year Green if m 0 Yellow if m 0 Red if m 0 Black if there are no new submitters for several periods CM IWA 1 An event is defined as any kind of activity measurable from a community Generally speaking posts commits or bug reports Monthly analysis will provide a general view of the project and its tendency Taking into account the slope of the resultant line y mx b while measuring the aggregated number and periods of one year Green if m 0 Yellow if m 0 Red if m 0 Black if there are no new submitters for several periods CM IWA 2 Monthly analysis will provide a general view of the project In this way an increase or decrease in the number of commits will show the tendency of the community Taking into account the slope of the resultant line y mx b while measuring the aggregated number and periods of one year Green if m 0 Yellow if m 0 Red if m 0 Black if there are no new submitters for several periods CM IWA 3 Number of people working on old releases out of total work on the project We can determine how supported are the old releases for maintenance purposes Green More than 10 Yellow Between 5 and 10 Red Between 0 and 5 Black Nobody CM IWA 4 Looking at the number of committers per each file This metric shows the

    Original URL path: http://carlodaffara.conecta.it/2009/04/page/2/index.html (2016-02-18)
    Open archived version from archive

  • 02 « April « 2009 « carlodaffara.conecta.it
    balance shows an increase in the number of people coming to the project Yellow The balance is equal to 0 Red The balance shows an increase in the number of people leaving the project Black The balance shows a really high number of people leaving the project CM SRA 7 Average age of people working on a project This metric is focused on the average of years worked by each developer With this approximation we are able to know of members are approaching this limit and we can estimate future effort needs Green The longevity is older than 3 years Yellow The longevity is older than 2 years and younger than 3 years Red The longevity is older than 1 year and younger than 2 years Black The longevity is younger than 1 year CM SRA 8 Evolution of people who contribute to the source code and reporting bugs A way to retrieve this data is to analyze those committers and reporters with the same nickname Taking into account the slope of the resultant line y mx b while measuring the aggregated number and periods of one year Green if m 0 Yellow if m 0 Red if m 0 Black if there are no new submitters for several periods CM SRA 9 Same metric than above but this is the sum of all of them and not the evolution General number We can measure the size of a community Taking into account the slope of the resultant line y mx b while measuring the aggregated number and periods of one year Green if m 0 Yellow if m 0 Red if m 0 Black if there are no new submitters for several periods CM IWA 1 An event is defined as any kind of activity measurable from a community Generally speaking posts commits or bug reports Monthly analysis will provide a general view of the project and its tendency Taking into account the slope of the resultant line y mx b while measuring the aggregated number and periods of one year Green if m 0 Yellow if m 0 Red if m 0 Black if there are no new submitters for several periods CM IWA 2 Monthly analysis will provide a general view of the project In this way an increase or decrease in the number of commits will show the tendency of the community Taking into account the slope of the resultant line y mx b while measuring the aggregated number and periods of one year Green if m 0 Yellow if m 0 Red if m 0 Black if there are no new submitters for several periods CM IWA 3 Number of people working on old releases out of total work on the project We can determine how supported are the old releases for maintenance purposes Green More than 10 Yellow Between 5 and 10 Red Between 0 and 5 Black Nobody CM IWA 4 Looking at the number of committers per each file This metric shows

    Original URL path: http://carlodaffara.conecta.it/2009/04/02/index.html (2016-02-18)
    Open archived version from archive



  •