Open at Adobe

A big day for Adobe.  Flex 3 SDK goes live. This is a big deal for us, since it fulfills the first part of our open source efforts, and completes the commitment from last year. Also ready for real world is BlazeDS. Oh yeah, a little free product called AIR went version 1 today. (Now AIR isn't open source, but it is free.)  And we're still looking for Linux alpha users; see Even Penguins can get a breath of fresh AIR.

(actually, there are a lot of our projects out there on the newly launched Adobe Open Source site.)

In short, open source is important to Adobe.

 A year ago (a bit more), when I joined Adobe for open source, I was personally frustrated in trying to find all the places we have open source activities. And yes, it's not perfect yet.  But one of O'Reilly's thoughts on development patterns in open source is the perpetual beta. Consider our open source work a perpetual beta; it's change, evolve, grow.

There was some interesting blogs on how little, how slow.

Well, let's look at it this way. A research paper pointed out the change in communication models over the years, from phone calls, to emails, to IM and Tweets. The interesting things was in the age dynamic. Kids tend to favor the 140 character message, adults favor the phone call.

Well, many of you probably are in the mix of email, IM, tweet, etc, You've learned the power of new behavior. Companies also need to learn new behavior.And we're trying to move a company by the easy way, explanation, rather than the hard way, explosion.

Anyway, I'm sitting here at the Adobe Engage event, and we demonstrated the AIR alpha on Linux (Ubuntu), with the same app directly across from Mac.  Small steps, but the fact that they are occurring are important.

So it's a journey. Please join in with us. We're recreating the experience and making it possible to show Adobe the interest and power of the open source world. But that depends on you as much as it does us.

Posted by Dave McAllister at 11:18 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Over the last year, Adobe has begun to openly (pun intended) talk about our involvement with open source. We launched it with Tamarin, the Flex SDK commitment,followed it with Flex-Ajax Bridge, Flex-Ajax Video, XMP, BlazeDS, Tamarin Tracing; the list can go on.

And it even got noticed. Be it Shankland on CNET, appearances on "The Open Season" , or just a chance to delve back into the roots with Adobe Edge, it's been a pretty active year. And now, one more step.

Adobe is launching it own portal into Open at Adobe. Yeah, it's low key, but then, it's about source of it all, not just glitz and glamor.  It's where to find all sorts of stuff that's going on in Adobe, source, news.  It's a place to talk to us. It's a place to tell us what you're working on.

Like any good project, you could think of this site as perpetual beta. It's going to change, and hopefully, you'll be one of those folks helping it change. In fact, if you've got an open source project related to Adobe products, tell us about it.

So, please.  Hop over to http://opensource.adobe.com.  Say HI!, download some code, tell us what you think.

And feel free to come back.

Posted by Dave McAllister at 09:06 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Adobe Joins the SQLite Consortium

Adobe has joined with Mozilla and Symbian to support the work of the SQLite Consortium to help ensure free, open access and development of SQLite.

The SQLite Consortium is a group of companies that use SQLite in their products and who have banded together to help insure that the SQLite Developers have funding to continue enhancing and improving SQLite and so insure that the SQLite Developers remain independent and free to act in the best interests of the community.

Adobe recognizes the importance of providing support for technology and tools that are open source because of its value to the entire developer community. By supporting the work of the SQLite consortium, Adobe is supporting the continued growth and improvements in SQLite.

SQLite is a different concept in SQL databases and is intended for non-traditional roles. SQLite is serverless - it writes directly to ordinary disk file, and SQLite is designed to require no maintenance or administration. And SQLite powers a heck of a lot of products, from Adobe and from others.

Adobe's support of the SQLite Consortium demonstrates Adobe's commitment to open source, and belief that technologies such as SQLite should remain independent and free in the best interests of the community.

Posted by Dave McAllister at 09:05 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

It's often been said that the open source community has the ability to innovate and can respond quicker than any other community.

And the Rich Internet Application space is ready for both. Adobe® AIR™ lets developers use their existing web development skills in HTML, AJAX, Flash and Flex to build and deploy rich Internet applications to the desktop.

Over on one of my counterparts (James Ward) blogs, is an invitation to apply for an opportunity to test AIR on Linux.

You know, this isn't for the faint of heart.  It's in the wild and wooley world of lots of builds, lots of things that might not work.  But I can't think of any group that  could make it possible for AIR to make it onto Linux.

So, hop over to the home of Adobe's RIA Cowboy and give us a hand.

Posted by Dave McAllister at 09:54 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

Just when you thought it was safe to go back into those SCO-chum filled waters, it appears that a fresh infusion of cash, a majority buy out, and privatization have made it possible for SCO to continue to pursue Linux infringements. But it looks like McBride may be toast.

Privatization, or privateering. Are those chum filled waters attracking pirates? And it's not even "talk like a pirate day"

Read more about it on Groklaw.

Posted by Dave McAllister at 10:07 AM | Permalink

A funny thing happened on my walk to the train yesterday. One of my compatriots asked for clarification on the belief that open source does not innovate.

Not technology, mind you.  But innovation in product and market.

Now, I can come up with lots of interesting examples of technology, cooler, clever, etc. But my thoughts on products and companies were usually rejected. Some of those rejections are perhaps suspect; is Alfreso really related to Vignette?

So, here's the challenge. Give me a company or product that is open source from onset, and that defines a market or enables a new business. (note, not a new business model, a new business. )

---

One of the comments asked for an extension to the question.

Well, trying not to limit this too much, but. Say that the Content Management Software defines a new business. Is this uniquely powered by open source innovation? Or is the RIA space? Is there something unique in mobile?

The successes of open source (quick, name the top ten products in open source) seem to be following a commoditization trend. What I want to know (since I'm really tired of this Ivory tower view of the world I'm limited to right now), is what am I missing? What product, project, or concept categorybegan with open source, or is uniquely enabled by open source?

Posted by Dave McAllister at 10:25 AM | Permalink | Comments (9)

An interesting question came up in some after-hours discussions the other day.

Is it ever a good idea to open source a program or technology from within a company if the company is no longer enhancing it? Basically, is dead code ever a good thing for open source?

My immediate reaction to this was no. Then yes. And finally, a definite maybe. (Inspired no doubt by a glass or to of my new fave-rave Cabernet, Parallel.)

So, it seems wise to appeal to the wisdom of the internet. What do you think? (If you want to go comment before reading farther, feel free, I'll wait).

First no.  It seems that if a company is no longer interested in a product, then the act of open source is a Monty Python attempt to run away. Companies that open source code, particularly complex code have a obligation to aid and assist the community in working with that code. One of my rules for considering open source (in fact, the principal rule) is "Who cares?". That question goes both ways.  Who cares about the code inside the company as well as outside the company. What shape is the code in?  Who takes ownership? It seems like the problems are big, bigger than any advantages.

But then, well, yes.  If a company isn't interested in supporting or extending a product, why shouldn't the open source community (mythical though it may be) have a shot at it.  Aren't there customers that are using it? What happens to them? Can't the mere act of opening good code balance against the lack of corporate support?

Finally (in vino veritas, you know), a definite maybe, surrounded by  ifs.

If someone cares that the program continues, and is will to commit their resources, why shouldn't the code be released? If the code is good enough, and doesn't include other properties, why not release it? If a community is available to control and govern it, why not? If the product was good enough to build a market on its own right, why should we believe it can't continue?

So, to both of my readers <grin>, what do you think? Should dead code be released?  Are there examples of it working, or failing? And what do you think are the steps that would help us decide?

Posted by Dave McAllister at 10:26 AM | Permalink | Comments (9)

Caution - small grouchy rant following.

I said it in 1998 and it's still true today. "Linux will only be important when nobody cares."

End users don't care about the operating system. Developers care. Information architects care. Administrators care. But the guy doing his job, be it reading email, talking on his phone, driving a taxi doesn't care... as long as it works. When it breaks, then these guys get upset. Why/where is Linux successful today? In places controlled by a "care' category. Where is it heading? In places where "breaking" means a big deal. What's been the hard part to crack? (In '99 I predicted a 5% desktop for Linux by 2006). Places where it OS is overwhelmed by the applications.

Fortunately, the applications are coming up to meet the "good enough" levels and the "doesn't break" requirements. And fortunately, people are beginning to care.

Linux is an (nearly) invisible enabling technology. So was Intel at one time. Intel successfully branded "Intel Inside". Unfortunately, it's not "Linux inside" to the end user, it's Red Hat, or Debian, or SuSE, or Ubuntu. It could be "Linux Inside", but based on a previous life with MIPS, the phrase really should be "Attitude Inside". (This was a short lived T-shirt run of MIPS before the Intel lawyers sharpened their pens.)

The open source world is full of attitude. It's full of ambition, talent, overarching goals and ego. It's creative, driven and a great place to work. But in infrastructure, it's invisible (except to specialized people who care) and should be. And in applications, it needs the attitude to drive and thrive.

We hype how well Apache does, and it's success being an open source success. Nonsense. Apache's success is  because of how well it works, what it does, and to be fair, it's underlying costs. Maybe driven by open source, but not because it is open source.  And honestly, of the billions of hits on Apache served pages, how many of those visitors ever go "Wow. Thank goodness this web site is running on open source Apache!".

Does the average advertising executive care if the image he picked was photoshopped or GIMPed? Really? The artist may care, the designer might care, the ad exec could care less.

One of my colleagues has a rule here that you may not just say "XML".  You have to state "XML for ". Try it.  XML alone describes nothing.  XML for ____ describes everything. Linux needs a similar rule.

Anyway, my apologies for the rant. Triggered by an exchange of emails on how we need to promote Linux... when honestly, it will win just as well without hype.

Posted by Dave McAllister at 09:11 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)