Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #28945 > unrolled thread

Re: Apache, Eclipse, ... Why do they do this?

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.java.programmer

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: Apache, Eclipse, ... Why do they do this? Josip Almasi <joe@vrspace.org> - 2014-07-04 12:27 +0200
    Re: Apache, Eclipse, ... Why do they do this? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2014-07-04 23:09 -0400
    Re: Apache, Eclipse, ... Why do they do this? jebblue <n@n.nnn> - 2014-07-10 09:23 -0500
      Re: Apache, Eclipse, ... Why do they do this? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2014-07-10 12:28 -0400

#28945 — Re: Apache, Eclipse, ... Why do they do this?

On 07/04/2014 03:28 AM, Stefan Ram wrote:
>    Apache and the Eclipse Foundation work to create libraries
>    and software, and then they give it to you for free. Why are
>    they doing this?

Why not?

> Several parties pay for them, for example
>    IBM supports Eclipse (for example, in 2001, they supported
>    Eclipse with 40 million USD), why do they do this?

... as did google, yahoo, microsoft, and everybody who is anybody:
http://www.apache.org/foundation/thanks.html

Check out apache organization chart:
http://www.apache.org/foundation/governance/orgchart

As you can see, there's 9 directors governing work of 3000+ people on 
100+ projects, and 10 more for infrastructure, fundraising and all other 
outside business.
How many directors, managers, salespersons, lawyers, marketing people 
would an IBM need to do the same, but proprietary, thing?
Obviously, open source is organizationally superior to proprietary model.
And, production is waaay cheaper.

What about tech support?
Often, users self-organize and answer each other questions.
OTOH, Cisco had about 4000 people in tech support some 10+ years ago.
Bug reporting and fixing also superior - user who can pipnpoint the bug 
can fix it, or reach the developper who can fix it.

All this works out wonderfully as long as techies are users.

Regards...

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#28950

On 7/4/2014 6:27 AM, Josip Almasi wrote:
> On 07/04/2014 03:28 AM, Stefan Ram wrote:
>> Several parties pay for them, for example
>>    IBM supports Eclipse (for example, in 2001, they supported
>>    Eclipse with 40 million USD), why do they do this?
>
> ... as did google, yahoo, microsoft, and everybody who is anybody:
> http://www.apache.org/foundation/thanks.html

Lots of companies contribute to ASF.

But for many years IBM was very close to ASF. As IBM contributed
a lot of code and they were close in the license/political game.

I suspect that the relationship may have cooled slightly after
Oracle convinced IBM to drop their support for Harmony.

Arne

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29026

On Fri, 04 Jul 2014 12:27:17 +0200, Josip Almasi wrote:

> On 07/04/2014 03:28 AM, Stefan Ram wrote:
>>    Apache and the Eclipse Foundation work to create libraries
>>    and software, and then they give it to you for free. Why are
>>    they doing this?
> 
> Why not?
> 
>> Several parties pay for them, for example
>>    IBM supports Eclipse (for example, in 2001, they supported
>>    Eclipse with 40 million USD), why do they do this?
> 
> ... as did google, yahoo, microsoft, and everybody who is anybody:
> http://www.apache.org/foundation/thanks.html
> 
> Check out apache organization chart:
> http://www.apache.org/foundation/governance/orgchart
> 
> As you can see, there's 9 directors governing work of 3000+ people on 
> 100+ projects, and 10 more for infrastructure, fundraising and all other 
> outside business.
> How many directors, managers, salespersons, lawyers, marketing people 
> would an IBM need to do the same, but proprietary, thing?
> Obviously, open source is organizationally superior to proprietary model.
> And, production is waaay cheaper.
> 
> What about tech support?
> Often, users self-organize and answer each other questions.
> OTOH, Cisco had about 4000 people in tech support some 10+ years ago.
> Bug reporting and fixing also superior - user who can pipnpoint the bug 
> can fix it, or reach the developper who can fix it.
> 
> All this works out wonderfully as long as techies are users.
> 
> Regards...

It surprises me to see Microsoft on that thanks list.

Overall great response, thanks for the information.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#29029

On 7/10/2014 10:23 AM, jebblue wrote:
> On Fri, 04 Jul 2014 12:27:17 +0200, Josip Almasi wrote:
>> On 07/04/2014 03:28 AM, Stefan Ram wrote:
>>>     Apache and the Eclipse Foundation work to create libraries
>>>     and software, and then they give it to you for free. Why are
>>>     they doing this?
>>
>> Why not?
>>
>>> Several parties pay for them, for example
>>>     IBM supports Eclipse (for example, in 2001, they supported
>>>     Eclipse with 40 million USD), why do they do this?
>>
>> ... as did google, yahoo, microsoft, and everybody who is anybody:
>> http://www.apache.org/foundation/thanks.html
>
> It surprises me to see Microsoft on that thanks list.

MS has been releasing lots of open source the last
few years.

Including most of ASP.NET.

Arne

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.java.programmer

csiph-web