A senior executive at SAP has criticised the open source development
methodology by claiming that it does not promote innovation, according to reports.Shai Agassi, president of the product and technology group at SAP, said in a speech at a club in California that Linux is not innovative, according to an article on technology news site VNUNet this week.
"We all talk about how great Linux is," Agassi reportedly said. "But if you look at the most innovative desktop today, Microsoft's Vista is not copying Linux, it is copying Apple."
SAP will not make its software open source as it would no longer have an incentive to innovate, Agassi said.
"Intellectual property [IP] socialism is the worst that can happen to any IP-based society," he said. "And we are an IP-based society. If there is no way to protect IP, there is no reason to invest in IP."
Florian Mueller, a software developer and anti-patent campaigner, described Agassi's comments as "FUD" [fear, uncertainty and doubt].
He warned that SAP has a "huge influence" on a new lobby group, the European Software Association, which is likely to lobby the EU against open source.
"[The ESA] are going to tell politicians just the kind of stuff that Shai Agassi said in order to try to prevent public administrations from migrating to FOSS solutions and from promoting FOSS development in Europe," said Mueller. The ESA was launched last month.
SAP is not the first company to claim that open source development is not compatible with capitalism. In an interview earlier this year, Microsoft's chairman Bill Gates implied that free software developers were communists.
"There are some new modern-day sort of communists who want to get rid of the incentive for musicians and moviemakers and software makers under various guises. They don't think that those incentives should exist," said Gates in the interview.
This is a view shared by some politicians also, with Eastern European countries reportedly concerned about using open source software in case they are seen as communists.
The full VNUNet article can be viewed here.
Talkback
GSCE History always taught me to look at a source of information for bias. My teacher always said, ask questions.
Such as:
- Why did this person make this statement?
- What bias does that person have?
- Why does this person have bias?
It's pretty obvious that if you can be bothered to spend the time to make such statements then you clearly have an issue with Linux. You are clearly biased against it.
Why does this person have bias? Clearly he is trying to say that Linux is not contributing any ideas, rather leaching off of other peoples' ideas.
Clearly this guy has his own vested interests in putting other people off of Linux. What could that be exactly?
A quick google search for his name reveals....
"SAP and Microsoft aim to drive enhanced efficiency for information workers, who rely on Microsoft Office as their primary work environment." *
So it seems that SAP rely on Microsoft for their income... Either directly or indirectly.
So it would then seem that Linux is a threat to SAP. Which would explain why an SAP exec is telling people that Linux is bad.
It's not really rocket science. Well I am so glad I took History at A level. The skills I learnt make everything so clear.
LINK: http://www.sap.com/company/press/press.epx?pressID=4520
"We all talk about how great Linux is," Agassi reportedly said. "But if you look at the most innovative desktop today, Microsoft's Vista is not copying Linux, it is copying Apple."
This guy haves no idea where he's talking about...
No innovation?
so... PHP is not innovation, regardless that half the total hipe of Microsoft .Net campaign is based in ASP.Net which is an evolution of ASP (created as a competitor to PHP)
And I suppose 3D desktop experience is also not innovative. because before Avalon/WPF ideas came long after project looking glass (Apple's Aqua is incredible, but is not really 3D)
And off course Microsoft's XAML (the main GUI development technology in Windows Vista) is not based on the ideas of the free, opensource, Mozilla's XUL
The new Office 12 XML formats then are not going to be several years after OpenOffice's own XML based format (than now has been replaced by ODF)
And I could go on for quite a long time if I wanted... HURD, LATEX, CVS, Perl/Python/Ruby/Lua, etc
I am not saying that proprietary software does not innovate, but free software also innovates and not at any slower rate. And most of the time, innovation is not an immediate action. but a process that takes time and contribution for different entities... every new discovery bases on previous ones, and this is favored by free (as in freedom) patent-less software
Definately sounds like they are toeing the party line of the old school proprietary companies, but SAP should have a look at the amazing innovation going on at IBM, with their Open Power Architecture, Cell chips and the wealth of new FOSS products to go with them,
or how about the amazing transition that Novell is doing to their once proprietary company with the SUSE acquistion and the port of the Netware stack,
or how about Oracle, Xara, Nokia, Wind River and many others who sucessfully made the migration to a new business model based on services on top of their Open Sourced IP.
Of course with MS also moving to a service oriented model on the web, which presumes a move to a thin client architecture, SAP may find their monolithic approach no longer relevant in the future market place.
SAP is trying to make this political to server their interests and mask the truth!
The truth is that they favor a dictatorship world like Microsoft which is the REAL danger in computing today.
Shai Agassi is afraid of open source because he's cares about his wallet, not people and technology!
Freedom and community is what open source is all about.
I'm not afraid of that. Are you?
'Socialism' is such a powerfull word nowedays. It makes politicians and other decision makers go emotional and turn a blind eye to the real motivations.
Take the "IP-based free market" for example. That's based on keeping those that are in control stay in control even more so. How's that going to help innovation? What's the motivation to innovate if people have no other option then to buy what you feed them when you want to? What kind of a "free market" is that?
"To be the first" (the usual IP candidate) is a huge advantage in today's world. Competitors might be inclined to reverse engineer that but they'll never be able to do it as fast as simply making an agreement with you, the inventor. And all the while you're steaming ahead and making inroads here and there. Storming the markets if you will. And once customers have invested in you they're not so likely to change that soon. Get there and before you know it several others will have signed contracts with you (get in on the deal) and you'll be set for years. You see, reverse engineering might get give them the methods at that moment in time but it won't give them the methodology behind the whole idea. Ask, for example, any virus writer. And between you and me, I think that virus writers in general are (or at least have been) ahead of the game for years.
So, in my humble opinion, "being the first" has more then enough benefits in an IP-free software market.
Why IP-free? Well, so far it seems that the only choices we have in reality is either IP-free or IP-rich. And given the plenty of examples of bad software patents "rewarded" I rather opt for IP-free then for IP-rich.
The basic question then becomes: what would be the requirements to inspire plenty of people and companies to try to "be the first"? The idea that "being the first" does come with (financial) advantages? Or the idea that if they don't get their (costly) IP act together they run the risk of financially bleeding to death while fighting organizations a couple of magnitudes greater then them in several courts of law for the next coming years?
I think the latter is the most sure way to kill innovation worldwide unless you actually believe that innovations can only come from companies with big enough pockets to buy all the IP in the world one way or another. Basicly reducing "innovation" to a power game then.
Call this 'socialism' or 'nationalism' or whatever other political incorrect label you want to put on this to fit the needs of your own (hidden) agenda. I'll just call it what it is: 'common sense'.
Gee, such stupid statements, such grand salaries. I should have been a moron instead of a scientist, I'd be rich!
The target is not Linux as such, this is just more propaganda attempting to confuse the issues of Copyright and Patent law. SAP, along with MS and numerous other heavies want the EU commission to adopt Software Patents. Of course it's not good to share - anyone who shares things should be hung because they must be depriving some greedy little weasel of money. Greed is good - if you had to pay for the air you breathe that's even better.
I really like that line about "Linux is not innovative"... because MS are copying the Apple GUI. It's like "It's going to rain today because the boss is wearing a green tie", or "Don't buy stocks from The Car Manufacturing Company because
the Printer Manufacturing Company is copying its designs from High Quality Printers Inc."
What's really sad is that most people are so dumb they can't even spot such an obvious 'non-sequitur'.
Wait... Isn't Parts of OS X open source? IIRC, OpenBSD is opensource. And what about the source that people provide for their Applications on Windows and Mac? Is that communist because someone think that someone might be able to help it along? I swear, If we all were doing nothing but having to buy software, we all would be poor. And then OS X would be no place, as there would be no BSD
Open Source movement does not provide incentive to innovate - and that is a news to me.
Who brought the tabbed browsing?
My own idea of non-flat game boards was crazy enough to be a commercial software. I made it open source at http://surfaces.sourceforge.net. I am working with open source enthusiasts to make full fledged games out of it.
There is something wrong with the understanding of open source at SAP.
Neither do you its "....What he's talking about..." not "...Where he's talking about.." Dickhead!!
Funny guy,
first he tells us that MS (wich is not exactly an open source company) copies apple and then he tells us OSS is not innovative.
Istn't apple's os x based on Darwin?
Which is yes, an open source project..
Istn't safari based on the khtml engine,
build by the KDE open source project.
is it an actual requirement to be stupid to be a topmanager?. Many times I am to believe indeed it is!!.
Free Market == No Patents/Copyrights! I"P" IS socialism.
I"P"s government meddling for the (dubious, never honestly demonstrated) "benefit" of society by the creation of artificial monopolies to "encourage" creators for the long term "greater good".
It's time to end the idiocy, abolish patent and copyright.
"We all talk about how great Linux is," Agassi reportedly said. "But if you look at the most innovative desktop today, Microsoft's Vista is not copying Linux, it is copying Apple."
http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/dashboard/
...followed by the sudden introduction of:
http://microsoftgadgets.com/
http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/spotlight/
...followed by the sudden introduction of, and then retraction of:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/data/WinFS/default.aspx
(works at a different level, but the userland programs follow the same idea as the above)
The Vista screenshots also bare a striking resemblance to OS X, including whatever integrated browser they're using as a shell now:
http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/safari/
http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/presskits/windowsvista/images/image002.jpg
These are just three examples. There are no doubt patent lawsuits ready and waiting on both sides.
This is not to say that it's just Microsoft that are at it, Apple are too. Take a look at the old konfabulator fiasco:
http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/technology/archives/2004/06/30/cupertino_start_your_photocopiers.html
Everybody's at it. Look at the hundred or so iPod ripoffs.
Err...if OSS is so 'bad' then why is SAP investing in companies like Ross Mayfield's SocialText?
SAP as we know is used all over the UK, many businesses use it (I saw it used in HomeBase stores), also SAP is found in the educational sector. SAP relies on integration with that’s already there, and in most cases it's Windows XP and Microsoft Office, this is of course not the same for everywhere, but in general secretaries in schools don't know what Linux is.
Microsoft has just signed a £1 million pound sterling deal with our local Educational authority as mentioned in ‘The Sentinel’ newspaper recently. This is to provide license coverage for all its offices and machines and schools. They then sell on the volume license to the schools at a profit or that’s at least what I believe they are doing (around £35 pounds a license).
So here we have SAP (a school used program too) and their programmers all worrying about Linux as they don’t know what to do with integration and here is Microsoft with a heavy heart lowering their price to fight their way in at the LEA’s, Local Governments and so forth, while all the time Linux is still getting stronger.
Microsoft is still worried after signing these deals, as Linux can be adopted at any level, anytime. With SAP at their side they have an extra ammunition against the fearful penguins and against the local governments adopters of linux. While all this is happening BECTA (a government agency) has produced a study on why Linux is the way forward in Government.
The only option they have, is to do a preemptive strike, shake as many hands with as many people and hope for the best.
Good Luck Microsoft, you need it.
Why do powerful software companies fear open source?
Is because a guy or Girl in his or her garage, house or Apartment could put them out of business.
I think because were now reached a point we did back in 1970 and 80’s when one company I wont name took an idea. And Took the world on it closed mined junkie ride.
The powerful software companies should ask them self this how many ex employees now work for open source projects and why? What would the world look like if we all only could buy only off spring of the Model T? Money is made off an idea but sooner or latter that Idea becomes common since and that when it should be added to open source. Then it is for the betterment of the whole world. If one company had a vaccine for AIDS and could SAVE millions but the only way be saved was to pay $500.00 how many would be saved.
"SAP slams..." Yes, he is certainly a sap, I thought. (I presume the headline writer knows what a "sap" is in American slang.)
But wait a minute. Maybe he isn't a sap, but just thought he was talking to a bunch of saps who would believe what he said...
Most economists agree that the concept of socialism is great, the problem is that it has never been shown to work without slipping into dictatorship.
So if OSS is socialism, and it works, great!
It has been my opinion since I started using OSS that it was the first demonstrated working socialist system.
The only reason calling something 'Socialist' automatically makes it seem like a bad thing is because of all of the scare tactics that took place back in the McCarthy era.
So, yes, OSS <u>is</u> socialist. More power to it.
~Jacob Smith -- lilomar2525 -AT- gmail.com
This post has been removed by a moderator.