XenSource calls VMware a cash-hogging automobile
Open source explained through car talk, bandits
LinuxWorld XenSource CTO Simon Crosby wishes all the best for the folks at VMware. But he has one simple request; please stop hogging all the money.
Open source virtualization has a long way to catch up with VMware's slice of market pie, but Crosby assured a panel at LinuxWorld the industry will be a happier place if open code does keep pace.
So why is open source better for everyone? Crosby expounds using that time-tested old chestnut, the automobile metaphor; Xen sells an engine. VMware sells a car.
Selling the "engine" for virtualization alone lets vendors add their own value to the product. Vendors can customize the rest of the package to meet specific customer needs and get to use their own brand. Everyone gets a piece of the pie. It's the sort of strategy seen with the storage management pact between XenSource and Symantec announced last month.
Crosby said this model not only serves customers best, but creates a powerful ecosystem of vendors with a viable economic model. But for this vision to work, the code needs to be open source and available to everyone. Something like — oh maybe— Xen.
Meanwhile, VMware is providing the whole car. It might be sleek, shiny and complete, but what you see is what you get — all at the mercy of VMware. Their proprietary code may get VMware rich, but it leaves everyone else in the cold. And as VMware's platform expands, it's bound to step on partner's toes more and more.
"We want people to use our codebase and have everyone make out like bandits," said Crosby. "Otherwise, only VMWare makes out like bandits. That's not good for the rest of us."
Hey, everyone making money sounds great, but we can't help but think Crosby's engine is running on unleaded sour grapes. ®
Xen or vmware
No virtual anything is that useful this is all a load of
hypothetical crap there isn't a problem in crying
need for these solutions admit it they aren't required for
anything.Who got all dreamy eyed over these needless
abstractions we have enough of those more is simply
playing with yourself.
Intelligent vs. Productive (or perhaps Open Source vs. Open Marketplace)
The open source debate from the perspective of those faced with the prospect of USING open source software (not those faced with DEVELOPING it which I think is a different story) seems to boil down to whether we as developers/sysadmins are paid to be intelligent or to be productive.
Honestly my employeer really isn't concerned with how intelligent I am. That simply isn't good enough for them. I can understand every single line of code in the Linux kernel and see where it fits into the big picture of the entire kernel stack, but at the end of the day, if I can't juggle the 12 tasks I've been given to the satisfaction of my boss and my customer, then what value am I to my company's business?
Besides, a truely "intelligent" sysadmin recognizes that in order to keep up pace with the business she must use her intelligence to be able to discern which vendors she can trust and which she can't trust to deliver reliable services and solutions that meet the customer's expectations. If I have to personally code review every peice of software I run in my shop then why not just write it all myself? What time am I saving in using someone else's stuff? And if I'm not personally code reviewing the software then why should I trust some random person/community in the open source world who is doing the code reviews for who-knows-what motivation as opposed to a company's internal employees doing the code reviews; employees whose motivation is perfectly clear and well understood: to please their managers who are interested in making the business money - money that is made by producing quality goods and services in an open marketplace. Why is it some want to inherently trust the "open source community" more than inidividual companies? Don't we all operate, as individuals, on the same principles of wanting to carve out a living for ourselves? Or are contributors and reviewers in the "open source community" really so altruistic and benevolent that they have no needs of their own they are trying to meet? I really think most open source fans would like to believe that open source programmers and reviewers are working under this, "the programming world has given me so much, it's about time I started giving back" mentality.
If anyone (perhaps someone has???) did a serious study of how many QUALIFIED eyes look at the source code of a given open source project and how many QUALIFIED eyes look at the source code of a given proprietary software product, I think most open sourcer's would be surprised at which solution really receives more scrutiny. I think the results of such a survey would show that the "yeah, but knowing that I COULD review the code if I wanted to" is a silly and impractical argument.
Lastly, I use both open source software and proprietary software. I choose which, not based on that criteria alone, but rather based on an intelligent (there's that word again) evaluation of which will best meet the needs and vision of my business. It would appear that Mr Crosby would prefer an Open Source world to an Open Marketplace world ("open source is the best solution, regardless of what the marketplace wants"). I don't think he does so out of an altruistic and benevolent mindset but rather because VMWare is incredibly successful in the Open Marketplace and ZenSource is not.
The biggest problem with VMWare
Not enough code review. There's not enough code review because the source code is *not* free and open.
VMWare is more open that Microsoft Windows - and chlorine is less toxic than fluorine. That doesn't make either VMWare or chlorine a good choice for my nutrition.
A totally-closed-source system is subject to "secret" vulnerabilities and exploits. That's why it's unacceptable to intelligent sysadmins.