Apply today for a FREE subscription to CIO Magazine!
Thu, Jul 6, 2006 12:47 EDT

|
Posted by: Bernard Golden Blog: The Open Source
Current Rating: |
If you've read my past couple of posts, you've seen that many attendees at the Catalyst Conference were aware of open source and its potential benefits, but nevertheless felt it was not "ready for prime time."
A fellow presenter, Adam Joffe of Sony Online Entertainment (SOE), offered a completely different perspective. SOE hosts multiplayer online games like EverQuest and Field Commander; these games can have thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of simultaneous participants.
And it's mostly run on open source -- thousands of Linux servers, applications written in open source scripting languages, and even open source-based databases.
As Adam explained it, the scope of SOE's infrastructure dictated the use of open source. Licensing costs for commercial alternatives would have driven the price of the final service too high. In other words, SOE designed a business based on the economics of open source, and thereby created an enormous revenue opportunity.
Regarding open source's prime-time readiness, Adam said that it was high-quality -- even better than commercial software.
He made some observations about the implications of open source:
It may be tempting to dismiss SOE as irrelevant to your situation -- online gaming is different from your business. Certainly the magnitude of SOE's computing infrastructure forced it to select open source. However, the explosion of data and Internet-based commerce activities (e.g., SOA) implies that many organizations will begin to take on characteristics of SOE and need to address licensing economics.
In my view, the evolution of our economy toward an information-intensive environment means that the old scarcity-based software licensing models are unsustainable. While your vendors will never help you move toward a business based on widely-available (but cheap) computing, you won't have a choice. Start getting ready for tomorrow's world of ubiquitous software, with all it implies.
I think it's hypocritical that Everquest is happy to RUN on Linux servers, saving them piles of cash, but the game cannot be played by persons running Linux on their home computers.
I don't buy the part of the argument that says you need employees who can go without support. There are a ton of options for support for Open Source. You simply aren't forced to buy them. In many cases, the author of the Open Source code him/herself makes their living providing such support.
Just because nobody is holding a gun to your head forcing you to pay to be told to "try rebooting your computer", doesn't mean the support is lacking.
Perhaps I didn't make it clear -- these are Adam's obsevations, not mine. You are absolutely correct that there are a number of options for support, including commercial support. In my experience, community support often outstrips commercial support (for both proprietary and open source software) in terms of responsiveness and quality. Using open source certainly does not mean complete self-reliance in terms of support.