Linux.com

Feature: Open Source

OGo: No go so far

By on July 14, 2003 (8:00:00 AM)

Share    Print    Comments   

- by Russell Pavlicek -
The <SLASH HREF="http://opengroupware.org/" ID="1a2b169976e1d7420bad03cbbd652d76" TITLE="" TYPE="LINK">OpenGroupware.org</SLASH> (OGo) project last week announced the release of its software under GPL and LGPL licenses. This new project claims to be the software that can replace Microsoft Exchange servers with a totally Open Source solution. As I looked at the press release, I saw quotes like "The release of OGo means the OpenOffice.org suite is ready for the enterprise complete with full-featured and mature groupware solutions." Unfortunately, after several hours of effort, I learned that this software is not yet ready for corporate use.

Background

OGo is an ambitious project seeking to provide many of the functions that are not currently available in most Open Source groupware solutions. To quote the press release: "OGo software will enable users to share calendar, address book and e-mail information; they can communicate via instant messaging, share folders, exchange documents, track changes, share a whiteboard, and browse the Web all at the same time -- all upon open Internet standards and without paying or managing cumbersome licensing fees."

The press release also quotes Gary Frederick, leader of the OpenOffice.org Groupware Project, as saying, "Just to be perfectly clear, this is an MS Exchange replacement. OGo is important because it's the missing link in the open source software stack. It's the end of a decade-long effort to map all the key infrastructure and standard desktop applications to free software."

OGo uses the code of Skyrix 4.1 Groupware Server, a product of the German firm Skyrix Software AG. This commercial product has seven years of development behind it, so OGo should be able to take advantage of the product's maturity.

Installation

I was eager to try OGo myself. Since this is the first release of the software, I was prepared to perform manual configuration to get everything installed properly. The Web site for the project promises that improved installation processes will be available shortly. Frankly, I'd settle for a complete installation process. Following the information on the Web pages does not produce a working system, at least as of July 12.

First, I downloaded a tarball of the appropriate kits to install. Since I was installing it on a Red Hat 9 box, I downloaded the 20MB tarball of RPMs. Unpacking the tarball yielded an impressive 48 RPMs. Thankfully, you only need to install 27 of them to get started; the rest are mostly development kits.

The OGo Web site outlines the order in which to install the kits. The instructions refer to a kit called "opengroupware-libxmlsaxdriver," which apparently should read "pengroupware-xml-libxmlsaxdriver." Other than that, installation was painless and uneventful, even if it took a while to cut and paste the 27 RPM file names in the prescribed order.

Next, I started up the PostgreSQL service and dutifully followed the configuration instructions, making the noted adjustments for the fact I was installing from RPMs (yes, the software installs to different locations on an RPM-based system than on a Debian system, so you have to make sure you adjust the directory trees in the instructions accordingly). One change I had to make was that I could not create the database as root on Red Hat. I had to "su postgres" (the default PostgreSQL username used by Red Hat) in order to create the database and user properly. I also had to create a user called "ogo" and do "su ogo" before I could access the database properly.

Then, when it came time to use the "Defaults" tool to configure the OGo server, I found that the utility's directory was missing from my PATH. Poking around, I found that I needed to execute source /opt/opengroupware.org/OpenGroupware.org.sh to make the environment variables correct.

I tried to set up the Web server so I could use the Web-based administration interface. However, the syntax for executing the OpenGroupware server was incorrect on the Web page. I had to adjust the executable's location to ./OpenGroupware.woa/ix86/linux-gnu/gnu-fd-nil/OpenGroupware instead of ./OpenGroupware.woa/linux-gnu/gnu-fd-nil/OpenGroupware as listed in the instructions.

I also found that the connector currently works only for Apache 1.3, not for Apache 2.x, which is found in Red Hat 9. If you need to install the software on Red Hat 9, you have to make sure that the older Apache server is installed. For testing, though, it is possible to run the OpenGroupware.org server in standalone mode.

To install the Apache connector, you need to manually compile some of the software to match your Apache version using a fairly lengthy set of instructions on the Web page. Unfortunately, I never got that far, since I couldn't get the standalone OGo server software to run well enough to justify the effort to interface it with Apache.

The information given about linking the server to a PostgreSQL database was thin at best. The original instructions were missing several steps, many of which were eventually posted to the mailing list in the form of a FAQ. Unfortunately, I was early enough in the loop that I found myself facing many of the problems before their solutions made their way into the FAQ.

To get the link to PostgreSQL to work, I had to perform a number of tasks which were not in any installation document at the time. I had to edit /var/lib/pgsql/data/postgresql.conf and set tcpip_socket = true to allow network connections to the database. I then had to issue the following commands to point OGo to PostgreSQL:

Defaults write NSGlobalDomain LSAdaptor PostgreSQL72
Defaults write NSGlobalDomain LSModelName OpenGroupware.org_PostgreSQL
Defaults write NSGlobalDomain NGBundlePath /opt/opengroupware.org/Library/OpenGroupware.org/

Then, as root, I had to edit /var/lib/pgsql/data/pg_hba.conf to include:

host     all         all         127.0.0.1         255.255.255.0     trust

so that PostgreSQL would accept connections from the local node.

But, lo and behold, the server started getting write errors when it tried to save information to its directory structure. So I had to:

chown opengroupware.skyrix ../WOApps

to make the directory tree accessible to server.

Next, as the user "opengroupware," I had to remove the empty directory ~OpenGroupware.woa/WebServerResources and create a link:

ln -s /opt/opengroupware.org/WebServerResources/ OpenGroupware.woa/

I could then access the OGo administrator interface using the URL http://localhost:20000/.

However, many things remained non-functional. For instance, all the links on the page assume node names of "wo" and "x," so to make things usable, I had to add these two node names to /etc/hosts, pointing them both to the localhost.

I also had to go back and create a documents directory, /opt/opengroupware.org/documents, and point the Web server to the new location:

Defaults write NSGlobalDomain LSAttachmentPath /opt/opengroupware.org/documents

Unfortunately, I soon found that I had at least a half dozen more problems by the time I got the server to limp along in standalone mode. Some links wouldn't work, the server would bomb after you visited a few screens, and it seemed to forget data entered last time and then rediscover it again. There was almost no information present on how to configure client software to access the server, and the instructions for compiling the Apache connector looked like a potential minefield.

At this point, I decided to cut my losses and quit. I had spent several hours learning, poking, and debugging, trying to compensate for the pitiful lack of documentation (and don't even think about referring to the commercial product documents; the commercial product has an installer so none of these issues arise there). I decided my time would be better spent looking at it again when it has usable installation instructions.

The long and short of it

The bottom line is this: the software may be mature, but the installation and configuration of the software is still pre-alpha. Without these necessary pieces, the code is currently useless to anyone but developers. As I write this on July 12, it is not ready for corporate users to download and test.

However, if the configuration portion is the only major work to be done, this situation could change dramatically within the month. The mailing lists seem active with users fighting the same battles I was fighting, and the project team was slowly growing a FAQ to deal with the questions as they arose.

It seems clear that the project team never bothered to do an installation on a pristine machine and simply write down the steps needed to do the job. Following the steps listed on the Web page results in software which is not even remotely functional. For a supposedly mature piece of software, it would seem that even a cumbersome step-by-step installation guide using PostgreSQL, the one database which everyone has, would have been an obvious document to release with the code. I can only hope that such a document will be developed quickly.

There is an important lesson to be learned here. It's one thing to announce the formation of a project and the release of code; it's another to announce that the software that will change the industry has arrived. Announcement of the project would have been greeted warmly, but there is no way anyone can claim that the software released on July 10 is actually usable by organizations. I wouldn't want to be in the shoes of someone who actually read the press release and downloaded the software with hopes of using the software in business. Someone like that might be slow to touch the project again after finding that the press release promises don't match the reality.

From what I could see of the software, OGo could be the most important new Open Source project of the year -- provided it can deliver on its promises. If all that is really missing here is installation and configuration information, the software might be usable by organizations in a few weeks. When the installation process is complete, I intend to revisit this software. Until that point, I don't recommend that organizations bother with a download for evaluation purposes. Developers and alpha-testers who want a hand in putting together a working solution should get involved and monitor the mailing lists carefully.

Russell Pavlicek is a consultant and author dealing with Linux in business. He is a panelist on The Linux Show weekly webcast, and is a contributor to a number of Linux Web sites. He formerly wrote the Open Source column for InfoWorld magazine.

Share    Print    Comments   

Comments

on OGo: No go so far

Note: Comments are owned by the poster. We are not responsible for their content.

Hopefully

Posted by: static on July 15, 2003 12:23 AM
With this, Openoffice, KDE's kroupware, etc, we'll start to see more corporate / government adoption of open source software alternatives.

#

Re:Hopefully

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 23, 2003 11:27 AM
> Capitalism should never win over Freedom.

You tell'em Comrade. Damned capitalist pigs!

#

Try Kolab 1.0

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 15, 2003 12:24 AM
Kolab server and KDE client just turned gold. Less hype, but a _very_ solid product.
Check it at <A HREF="http://kolab.kde.org/" TITLE="kde.org"> the kolab website </a kde.org>.
You will be plesantly surprised.

#

Re:Try Kolab 1.0

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 15, 2003 03:07 AM
Kant KDE keople kome ku kith kny kay ko kame khings kith kut kutting khe ketter "K" kn kront kf khem?

#

Re:Try Kolab 1.0

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 15, 2003 03:26 AM
Kindeed. Kthey kare kidiots. Kevery ktime ki kread KDE'isms kmy keyes khurt.

#

Re:Try Kolab 1.0

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 16, 2003 02:34 AM
gnuyou gnufind gnuit gnuany gnuworse gnuthan gnuthe gnufscking gnugnu gnuapps?

Strid...

#

Re:Try Kolab 1.0

Posted by: Helge Hess on July 15, 2003 05:02 AM
No, OGo and the Kolab server are just very different things. Kolab is simply a repackaged Cyrus and OpenLDAP server plus some scripts for configuration.
In fact Kolab is going to be an excellent mail backend for OGo and certainly recommended.

OGo is a groupware server, providing scheduling services, document sharing services, workflow facilities, scripted forms, project management, etc. BTW: everything accessible using XML based interfaces and therefore easily integrated into existing infrastructures.

The Kolab client apparently (according to the Kolab list) will still take a loong time until being committed to the KDE CVS. If it becomes available, OGo will certainly interface it like it interfaces almost any other client using it's powerful middleware server.

#

Re:Try Kolab 1.0

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 15, 2003 05:39 AM
Well, Kolab is far from a "repackaged Cyrus and open LDAP".
First, I must say, there is nothing wrong with using existing software. Kolab is maily a documented framework for grouware, with open and documented protocols for storage, retrieval, designed in a scalable way, with the tools to make it work today.
Kolab is more about design than about the tools used to make it work. Yes, it uses existing, reliable, proven software. Is it wrong?
It is true that Kolab is not a Notes replacement yet. It is more of a MS Exchange replacement. But it is far more than a "mail backend", it is indeed a groupware backend.

Second, the KDE client is working _today_. It is KDE 3.1 KMail and KOrganizer based and work fine thank you.
The new Kolab Client, a client that integrates all pim components and will provide support for Kolab will be released for 3.2. But it is _not_ true that you cannot get this funcionality today. Just use the simpler version that is available today.

#

Re:Try Kolab 1.0

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 15, 2003 08:08 PM
Absolute bollocks. Kolab is a full Groupware server commissioned for that purpose. I am sure Kolab could function as a mail backend for OGo, but it is a great deal more than that. K is used within KDE projects for branding purposes, so you know that they are KDE projects. Funny that.

#

Ease of installation

Posted by: Helge Hess on July 15, 2003 04:55 AM
Like installation of GNU/Linux from scratch is certainly not an easy task for a lot of people, the installation of OGo isn't particulary easy.
Like as a company you would buy the RedHat Advanced Server, you should, as a company, buy the SKYRiX distribution of OGo which takes care of exactly the questioned aspects - and in addition, the proper maintenance with an appropriate QA process.
OGo itself is "just" (it's a LOT) the source code. This of course doesn't mean that OGo is going to complicate things, you should expect to get a much easier installation in the next weeks.

That being said - to tryout OGo still the best way is to use the OGo Knoppix CD which will soon be available (thanks to high volume mirrors) on the OGo site for burning.

#

Chill...

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 15, 2003 05:07 AM
Hi there,

I sent a mail to a colleague a few days back - it said 'in a few years this will be a player'

As open source advocates/enthusiasts we need to see the difference between 'arrived' and 'will arrive' projects.

Don't recommend it to anyone until you have played with it yourself....

#

Re:Chill...

Posted by: Helge Hess on July 15, 2003 05:20 AM
While your statement is certainly true, you shouldn't forget that the code is already a few years old (seven to be exact) and well tested in 1000+ customer installations.

So this is not a "typical" OpenSource project being developed from scratch (like for example PHPgroupware).

Of course servers like Exchange or Notes are far older than seven years, but still OGo isn't starting exactly with nothing<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)

#

You've inspired me to try it

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 16, 2003 04:34 AM
> Don't recommend it to anyone until you have played with it yourself....

You're right. I like to be able to make recommendations, but I have no first-hand knowledge of this product.

So I'm taking your advice. I'm going to download and try OpenGroupware today.

While I'm at it, I think it's also about time that I tried out Evolution.

You're right that it is best to try out things for ourselves.

For example, I tried Linux, despite all the ZDnet articles that claimed it wasn't ready, and I will never go back to Windows.

Likewise, I tried Mozilla, when the naysayers were telling me not to, and I just loved it. In fact, I was so impressed that I started showing it to everyone at the office, which has resulted in a dozen more converts to Mozilla.

So I agree with you. I'm going to ignore Mr. Pavlicek's misgivings, and try OGo for myself.

#

say what?

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 15, 2003 06:52 AM
Are you actually saying that OPEN SOURCE software does not work as advertised? Such a thing is not possible. Open source is perfection.

Down with Microsoft.
Down with Evil!

#

Re:say what?

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 15, 2003 07:38 AM
Down with Microsoft.
Down with Evil!


Redundant.

#

Re:say what?

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 15, 2003 10:46 AM
lolololololololololololololol<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)

#

Re:say what?

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 15, 2003 11:06 AM
Amazing, ain't it? Too bad we never seem get this type of honesty after Microsoft announces its latest bug-filled product.

#

Re:say what?

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 15, 2003 10:27 PM
"Amazing, ain't it? Too bad we never seem get this type of honesty after Microsoft announces its latest bug-filled product."

What? This review wasn't by one of the OGo devlopers, it was by a guy who took it out for a test drive. This wasn't honesty since the reviewer has no personal stake in the project. He's just exposing what a piece of shit this so called "Exchange replacement" is. This isn't the OGo team coming clean, it's a third pary exposing how the open source community is just as prone to releasing hyped buggy crap just as much as proprietary vendors.

#

Re:say what?

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 16, 2003 10:39 AM
This review wasn't by one of the OGo devlopers

Duh. It was an unflattering review, so of course it wasn't written by one of the project's developers. The review criticized the installation and configuration process, not the quality or stability of the code. But you'd have to know how to read to get that.

#

A Commercial Idea that Might be helpfull

Posted by: HaveAnIdea on July 15, 2003 11:34 AM
I've been working for several days and reading articals and what not. Linux sounds like it's doing fairly well but I feel tux could do so much more. I've been developing a few commercials that could be put on in order to show everone that Windows isent always the easist and only choice. And as hopeing to turn this into a proffesion if someone would like to make it I have some already done. If Anybody is interested Please give me an Email At Kiro6565@hotmail.com. I don't in anyway want to spam this page I'm doing it all for linux.

#

Re:A Commercial Idea that Might be helpfull

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 15, 2003 12:25 PM
I guess IBM, Oracle and m$ (kidding) should have pro-Linux TV commercials.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I've never seen such commercials.

until then...

#

Re:A Commercial Idea that Might be helpfull

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 16, 2003 05:12 AM
Actually, you're wrong. IBM has run at least two TV ad campaigns mentioning Linux.

The first was an ad that starred Avery Brooks (aka Captain Sisko of Deep Space Nine), and was purely about Linux.

The other was a very funny, widely run ad called The Heist. At the end of the ad, the announcer says, "IBM servers running Linux -- good infrastructure that can save you a bundle."

I couldn't find a link for the first ad, but you can view The Heist here:

<A HREF="http://www-1.ibm.com/servers/eserver/zseries/os/linux/video/heist60.mpeg" TITLE="ibm.com">The Heist</a ibm.com>

#

Re:A Commercial Idea that Might be helpfull

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 16, 2003 11:16 AM
IBM and Oracle push Linux whenever they can. IBM features Linux on some TV commercials, for example the ad with basketball players with CIO speak on their jerseys instead of names - "Linux" was one of them.

I don't think Oracle does TV ads, however, they do a lot of print. Here's one I have in front of me: "[headline] Oracle makes Linux unbreakable [body] Everyone knows Linux costs less, now it's faster and more reliable too. oracle.com/linuxfaster"

#

Few weeks? Forget it

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 15, 2003 03:49 PM
It seems clear that the project team never bothered to do an installation on a pristine machine and simply write down the steps needed to do the job. Following the steps listed on the Web page results in software which is not even remotely functional.

Conclusion: OGo doesn't understand anything about software quality assurance.

If all that is really missing here is installation and configuration information, the software might be usable by organizations in a few weeks.

OGo has to learn about software quality assurance starting from zero (see above), and apply what they've learned. That's going to take more than a few weeks. If they start now, and learn fast, maybe six months. We'll see. Thanks for the review.

#

Re:Few weeks? Forget it

Posted by: dazk on July 16, 2003 02:52 AM
Obviously you have no idea what you are talking about. Skyrix 4.1 has been a stable product for quite some time now. Ogo is simply skyrix repackaged. They wanted to make the LinuxTag date that's all. I'd say there will be usable Ogo Packages quite soon.

But go right ahead and openly bash a product and the people backing it even though you obviously have no idea about it.

#

Re:Few weeks? Forget it

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 21, 2003 03:36 PM
Well, I think we have have been spoilt by the ease of installation on the Windows/Mac platforms.

Not wanting to go down the Exchange Server path, I recently explored Oracle Collaboration Suite, which is so competitively priced that you can't ignore it.

Then I knew why the take up wasn't fantastic for OCS - the installation was such a pain! It took me about 20 attempts before I could even complete the installation. Then when I fired up all the modules, the poor test machine simple locked up!

Then I tried OGo - I thought I was an idiot, but it seems that I wasn't the only one that couldn't get it to work as advertised.

#

Dreamer?

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 15, 2003 04:50 PM
everybody wants perfect software for zero efforts!!!
Mind spending your time helping open source projects instead of finger pointing what's not working perfectly. Everybody knows that.
Lots of people miss the point of open source: you can be part of it! to make things better.

#

Re:Dreamer?

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 15, 2003 09:09 PM
A point well said.

I have worked for many companies that have exchange and only use it for calender & e-mail, why spend thousands of dollars for that.

The difference with many open source projects, is that features are implemented which are actually used or wanted, not just what the developer/company decides you should have.

#

Sounds familiar

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 15, 2003 09:23 PM
I noticed the link on the openoffice.org site yesterday. Being very happy with openoffice and reading a few reviews, I decided to try out OGo. Well, needless to say all the problems you mentioned sound very familiar, I hit almost every one. With a bit of mailing list reading, IRC chatting and lots of playing around I have got to an almost workable stage. I think I will wait another week or two for some bug fixes before wasting more of my time. The idea is good though.

#

Same old story

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 15, 2003 09:43 PM
There is an overall lack of respect for the final user in the Open Source world. This is probably the worst problem, because
1) reduces adoption of OSS to an act of faith.
2) it leads to duplication of efforts, and to redundant and competing Open Source projects.

Have you not already seen the following scenario?
Program A is an Open Source program that might be useful to you: you download it, you install it, you find out it doesn't work off the shelf, you investigate a bit, you subscribe a mailing list, then, rightly or not, you come to the conclusion that simply it is not good enough.
Then, a) if you are an end user: you pay for a commercial product and never go back to Open Source, or b) if you are a programmer you start fiddling with the idea that you might write program B which is much much better ( of course you don't even figure out how to communicate your ideas to end user: it is not your job, because you are a god of programming, you can leave the documentation to some less gifted volounteer ). I think documentation and ease of use is the only key to success. SOFTWARE MUST WORK!!! stick that in your shiny brains.

#

Re:Same old story

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 16, 2003 01:36 AM
Well, an OSS person would say...
1) progress is being made, albeit slowly.
2) you have choice.

a) you can pay for open source software, and I bet the kind you do pay for is much more to your liking
b) this is a beuaty of open source. You can use other's code to make your own. Or take theirs and make it better.

I agree though that installation/documentation is neglected. Right now, we are like a new forest (see 'Succession'). We have grasses and brambles and a few trees (kernel, apache, php) As the forest matures, the grasses die off and get replaced with trees. Until you have a nice forest. The commercial world was able to come in and get some help, get planted and has care givers. Open source is by nature a lot less directed, but it will get there.

#

Nonsense -- OSS attitude beats the alternative

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 16, 2003 06:27 AM
> There is an overall lack of respect for the final user in the Open Source world.

First, That statement makes no sense at the outset, because, in most cases, the Open Source developers are also users of their own software. They want the software to work right, and they want it to be easy to use.

Second, your statement doesn't match reality. For example, just look at how quickly the ease of installation has improved in distributions like Red Hat or Mandrake. Or look at all of the end-user features that have been added to Mozilla, such as pop-up blocking, and Spam filtering.

And third, we have to put your claim in perspective. If you want to see serious disrespect for customers, just look at Microsoft.

For example, Microsoft continues to leave their Internet Explorer users vulnerable to <A HREF="http://www.pivx.com/larholm/unpatched/" TITLE="pivx.com">Nineteen Unpatched IE Security Holes.</a pivx.com>

Or consider Microsoft's attitude toward their J++ users, as shown in an internal Microsoft memo, uncovered by the <A HREF="http://java.sun.com/lawsuit/051498.unfair.html" TITLE="sun.com">Sun versus Microsoft</a sun.com> Java case:

> At this point its not good to create MORE noise around our win32 java classes. Instead we should just quietly grow j++ share and assume that people will take advantage of our classes without ever realizing they are building win32-only java apps.

Somehow, I don't view defrauding one's customers as a sign of respect.

> Have you not already seen the following scenario?
> Program A is an Open Source program that might be useful to you: you download it, you install it, you find out it doesn't work off the shelf...

I remember buying Windows 1.0. It was crap.

I remember buying Windows 2.0, having been convinced by Microsoft ads telling me how much it had improved. It was crap.

I remember finally using Windows 3.1, though it still wasn't as good as the Geoworks GUI that I was using two years earlier. Why didn't I continue to use Geoworks? Because Microsoft had intentionally changed DOS to sabotage Geoworks and put the company out of business. Some respect.

I remember that Microsoft also sabotaged my favorite word processor (AmiPro), our company's e-mail system (cc:Mail), and tied IE into Windows so that it would become a "jolting experience" (Microsoft's own words) for me to run Netscape.

I remember when Word 97 would not export to Word 95 format, which cost our company a great deal of money, because it forced us to upgrade everyone when we had no other reason to do so.

I remember the days before our company had given up on Microsoft's support: "Have you rebooted? Have you tried reinstalling Windows?"

I remember that IE 1.0, 2.0, and 3.0 were all completely unusable. I remember that IE 4.0 would still crash Windows on a regular basis.

What was that you were saying about Open Source software that doesn't work quite right?

> I think documentation and ease of use is the only key to success.

Ah yes, documentation.

I remember trying to get my printer to work, using the Windows 3.1 User Manual. It was hopeless, because the documentation was crap -- the information was simply not there. The books at the bookstore were no better, because they contained no additional information. My friend broke down, and paid Microsoft $400 CDN to get a set of professional manuals.

Meanwhile, with Linux, there are HowTo documents that will give me step-by-step instructions on how to do almost anything.

Also, with Linux, I can find whole shelves of books, ranging from beginners level right down to the detailed technical level. There is even a book that gives me a listing and explanation of the Linux kernel source code.

So what do you have against buying a book? You still end up paying less, yet getting more, than you do with closed source software.

#

Re:Nonsense -- OSS attitude beats the alternative

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 16, 2003 02:47 PM
You know, this is a point that doesn't get made often enough:

Open Source software has to mature like any other software package. People often think that OSS is unpolished because the 0.x releases, betas, and so on are downloadable by anyone. However, the reality is that if the software package were commercial, no-one (bar beta testers) would use the software until it went gold.

Time is of the essence. Mozilla struggled to get anywhere for 4 years, but look how far it's come in the past 12-18 months! Hopefully OGo will be the same.

-- GuruJ.

#

Re:Nonsense -- OSS attitude beats the alternative

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 17, 2003 12:06 AM
> Open Source software has to mature like any other software package.

Exactly, and that was one of my points. There is a double standard in the media, and even amongst some Open Source advocates, whereby commercial software is given a chance to grow, while Open Source software is immediately judged on a scale of perfection.

Of course we also know that some of the supposed negative reactions are actually propaganda spread by Microsoft.

But the other point was that it is ludicrous for the original poster to claim that Open Source developers are disrespectful, when the poster boy for closed source development is Microsoft.

It's true that some OSS developers can be rude, and blind to any gols but their own. It's fine if you want to complain about those developers.

But for the original poster to claim that this is a general indictment against Open Source, well, that's ridiculous!

And it is especially ridiculous to level such accusations against Open Source, when the main alternative from the closed source world is Microsoft:

- Microsoft is arrogant in the extreme.

- Microsoft not only puts their own goals ahead of the interests of their customers, but also ahead of the law, or any consideration of morality.

- Microsoft uses extortion against its own customers.

Microsoft leaves its customers open to loss of data, and loss of privacy.

- Microsoft has been caught lying to its customers.

- Microsoft has been caught sabotaging its customers' non-MS applications.

- And so on.

So, I agree with your point that a double standard is being used when judging the maturity of newly-released Open Source software.

And I am adding that a double standard is also being used to judge the attitude of Open Source developers.

And I am saying that the second point is even more unfair than the first, because, on average, the morality and manners of OSS developers are so far above those of a certain closed source competitor, that it's ridiculous to even compare the two.

And I am questioning the motives of the original poster. What does is mean when that poster would reject all of Open Source because of isolated incidents of rudeness, when the main alternative makes him a victim of fraud, extortion, and so on? I know what I think it means.

#

Re:Nonsense -- OSS attitude beats the alternative

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 20, 2003 07:40 AM
Open Source developers are also users of their own software

They are technically adept users, not casual users. Technically adept users do not represent the mass of computer users today.

how quickly the ease of installation has improved in distributions like Red Hat or Mandrake. Or look at all of the end-user features that have been added to Mozilla, such as pop-up blocking, and Spam filtering.

But the bulk of Open Source software has not made that leap.

serious disrespect for customers, just look at Microsoft.

At the same time, they make the user experience better. Obviously, a large number of customer do find value in Microsoft's software - they buy it or steal it. Many don't - they don't use it. But the key issue the OP mentioned was the user experience, not the customer experience. For that matter, the customer experience under Linux is non-existent, except from commercial redistributors like Redhat.

Windows 3.1 User Manual. It was hopeless, because the documentation was crap -- the information was simply not there.

If you are still running 3.1, you deserve every pain you suffer. The world has moved on - get more current examples.

Actually, the same argument can be said of trying to get my wireless ethernet to work with Linux. The documentation and software just isn't there or isn't working. I, for one, have better things to do than fix this problem - I have work to do which actually feeds me and which I can much more easily achieve in Windows.

You still end up paying less, yet getting more, than you do with closed source software.

Only if you're interested in the internals of the software. Like I said, I have work to do. The only thing that matters to me is if the software works or not. If it does, great. If not, it's not worth my time and effort.

#

Um, like Abiword, you mean

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 16, 2003 08:05 AM
Yup, this is exactly my experience with the Abiword development team. Arrogant would be a polite term for those blokes.

#

The long and short of it REALLY is...

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 15, 2003 10:05 PM
Russel's article goes in a detailed bug report, not in an article where it can be used as FUD by others.

#

Re:The long and short of it REALLY is...

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 16, 2003 10:49 AM
So you advocate "Open source, closed reviews"?

#

Typical of Linux

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 16, 2003 01:09 AM
Being new to the linux community and open source software I have come to find some people too critical of the applications. I repeat I am no programming expert and often find myself in forumns and chat rooms. After some research I usually end up with a working application that not only surprises me, but surpases Microsoft in almost every way. So stop being so critical, put a little bit of effort in and the project will eventually be very polished and user friendly.

#

Are you a Unix/Linux user?

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 16, 2003 01:41 AM
Although I do agree that the documentation could be better. A lot of your complaints are based on things such as not knowing anything about PostgreSQL or the basics or... oh the file permissions could be wrong.


No disrespect, but it seems you have been living in Windows world long enough that you expect simple installation.


The only simple installation of third party programs for Linux that I know of is the Samsung print drivers.

#

Consider the Target

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 16, 2003 03:28 AM
If this were a developer toolkit we were talking about, I'd agree with you. However, consider the target audience we're looking at here. This is not a "development community" audience, but a corporate environment. This is the kind of thing a sys-admin would be trying to install in an office environment. They already have too much work on their plate just trying to keep the day to day operations up and running. These people expect straight-forward, working installs, or they don't want to be bothered. They don't have the time to spend a week fighting with one application trying to get it to work.


I'm spending a week volunteering at a medium sized office for a not-for-profit organization, with an IT infrastructure entirely based on Linux. I'm spending a couple of days upgrading the version of Mozilla they are running. Now, installing Mozilla itself is brain-dead simple. Took me about ten minutes. What's hard is setting up the scripts and setup procedures to install and configure the individual preferences for when new people come in and accounts are set up, and for propagating new settings out to existing users. The IT people are surely smart enough to set these up, but they want the process as automated as possible, since Mozilla is just one of the dozen or so things they have to do in order to create a new account and getting someone up and running. My target is to create one command that will do the entire thing.


So yes. IT people in medium to large organizations expect simple installs. It's a different audience. Let the developers get their hands on this stuff and beat on it for a while. Let me know when I can follow a one page set of commands to set up the thing beginning to end. That's when I'll get excited.

#

Re:Are you a Unix/Linux user?

Posted by: Russell Pavlicek on July 16, 2003 04:38 AM
I've downloaded hundreds of "third party" apps from SourceForge and Freshmeat over the past few years (I made the switch to a Linux desktop in 1997, thank you). Most anything that calls itself ready for primetime can installed with a few commands and can be configured with a FAQ or HOWTO in hand. With the glowing pronouncements that this software was ready to change the world, I expected something similar at the very least. That is pretty standard in the Open Source world. The fact that you are unaware of this basic fact makes it just a little easier to swallow the insulting remarks you make in the rest of your comment.

Also, the reply that highlights that the software is aimed at the enterprise is right on the money. If this is an enterprise solution, it better darn well install according to the documentation. It doesn't. The documentation is wrong in parts and horribly incomplete in others. That is the kiss of death for any piece of enterprise software.

If you don't like doing the work to make something install easily, please don't join a team trying to release enterprise software. That's the standard for the enterprise, and it is close to the standard for most Open Source apps, too.

#

Ogo Install

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 16, 2003 01:44 AM
Ogo developers could have saved ALOT of people ALOT of hours by just waiting until their install was smoothed out. And I ran the install under VMWARE! 27 RPM's took FOREVER!

#

RERO

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 16, 2003 02:51 AM
I did install OGo last night on my debian server with few problems (followed the debian mini-howto). Many people are complaining about the quality of the install, QA, "they should have waited", etc. I think you are forgetting that one of open source's strengths is the concept of Release Early and Release Often. RERO allows for you the user to provide input at an early stage in the development process (for opengroupware it is the installation, documentation---not necessarily developing the app-server). So, stop complainning about QA and start providing feedback to the developers. There are mailing lists available to ask/give comment. I am not sure if there is a bug database yet, though? We need to focus on providing feedback to developers and helping where we can. This is a good review that brings to light some of the current weaknesses of opengroupware: 1. installation is a bit rought, 2. lack of english documentation (biggest problem IMHO).

#

Re:RERO

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 17, 2003 10:26 AM
Exactly. My only dispute would be the hype it was given on several sites including there own. I applaud the idea and enthusiam, I look forward to using it and I understand and completely agree with the concept of RERO; however, don't believe your own hype.

#

Author was a bit premature ...

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 16, 2003 03:52 AM
As someone else already noted, this author's article belongs more in a bug report than a product review.

As a matter of fact, a quick glance of the OGO website for today's news shows that the patches necessary for building on RH9 have just been checked<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. The same day that this bug report was posted to Newsforge.

#

Re:Author was a bit premature ...

Posted by: Russell Pavlicek on July 16, 2003 04:45 AM
No, the verbage in the press release was a bit premature. It said it was ready last week. It wasn't close.

If it's ready this week or next, that's great. They should send the press release saying it is ready for the enterprise then. Not last week when there wasn't anything close to working installation and configuration instructions.

#

Re:Author was a bit premature ...

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 17, 2003 07:12 AM
Oh come off it Russ... This is a rant, not an article.

And not a very well-reasoned one. How many untra-expensive commercial enterprise products practically require a consulting contract to get the software up and running?

If this is simply an article about some OSS not working, then it's simply not an article. Duh.

#

So, fine, the installation sucks...

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 16, 2003 04:46 AM
...but what's the app like? This is hardly a "review".

At minimum you could install the Knoppix OpenGroupware.org CD and review the app based on your experiences with *that*.

#

Re:So, fine, the installation sucks...

Posted by: Russell Pavlicek on July 16, 2003 05:56 AM
I'll do a full "review" when it is installable. I've been told by the developers that stage should be coming soon.

As far as the Knoppix CD: I'm not in Germany. The only source I've seen listed for the CD is a German magazine. But I'm not really interested in seeing what amounts to a useful demo. I want to test something which can deliver in the enterprise. Hopefully, we'll be at that point before much longer.

#

Re:So, fine, the installation sucks...

Posted by: Pawn026 on July 16, 2003 06:18 AM
Or you could take three steps back and work on some "super user friendly" OS, Windows 9X, Bla, Bla, Bla......

#

Publicists will kill us in the end

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 16, 2003 07:18 AM
There is no room in the Open Source world for vapourware. Those of us users who are still geeks demand accurate depictions of a program's capabilities - hopefully before we have to pore through the source code, or even the docs. The wider user community needs to have a product they can believe in and is worth the effort of switching to.

We have neither the money nor the captive audience that Microsoft does. We can't play by their rules. At minimum, we should have no inaccurate hype in our product descriptions; Adobe-like hype should be our limit.

#

Why not just compile?

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 16, 2003 12:42 PM
Did you try building from source? If you have
small knowledge on how to use compiler and
some build tools for GNUstep, libFoundation and
etc, it works well. At least the part I can fetch
the source code... Just say you cannot run it, not
it's bad. If you really want to run without
any hassle, buy Skyrix's commercial product.

#

Unfair

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 16, 2003 04:42 PM
This is quite an unfair "review".
This product represent a very big piece of code. You should really expect that the first release has installation problem - there is no way for the OGO team to test installation on every single version of every single distro.
We are typically in a Release Often Release Early mode - I have no doubt that the installation will get streamlined very quickly (forums are very active and packages get updated quicly).

Morevoer, you can expect distro packagers to enter the game soon. I would not be surprised to find OGO packages in Mandrake Cooker (or other) in the coming weeks.

In the meantime, the easiest way to test is through a live CD and, in my view, it is impressive.

Go OGO !

FFF

#

Re:Unfair

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 16, 2003 06:38 PM
Once again - this software was said to be ready for the enterprise.

#

Blend it with Kolab

Posted by: Leon Brooks on July 16, 2003 05:44 PM
Said the same thing on LWN, but...

Apparently Kolab and OGo overlap a fair bit, and the union of their GPLed code is pretty complete. OTOH if OGo alone is too much trouble, Russ, perhaps you'd better wait.

Now that enough bugs have been worked out that RH9 survives an install, it should be possible to produce a nicer set of RPMs. I'd expect one of the Mandrake maniacs like Texstar, Ranger or the PLF to whomp something up shortly.

#

Sensationalist Journalism :-(

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 17, 2003 01:09 AM
Here we have some BIG NEWS...

We have a new Open Source product that could prove to be very important, namely, OpenGroupware.

Some people are very excited about OpenGroupware.

Some people point to the fact that OpenGroupware fills a major gap in the Open Source lineup of office software.

Some people have valid issues: Let's make sure they do it right; Let's make sure it's truly Open; Let's make sure it isn't fudded into the ground; Let's hope it doesn't take too long; Let's get the word out; And so on.

But Russell Pavlicek doesn't want to talk about that.

He doesn't want to talk about OpenGroupware's potential importance. He doesn't want to talk about filling in the gaps, and succeeding in the enterprise. He doesn't want to talk about the excitement.

Because Russell Pavlicek has something much better:

SCANDAL!!!

Yes, It's true. After a full seven days since the release of the source code, OpenGroupware still doesn't have an easy install procedure, and a full set of documentation!

Can you imagine? Thay've had seven whole days! Just what have they been doing with their time???

But wait! There's something even jucier!

Some of those making the announcements for OpenGroupware may actually have said that it is ready for the enterprise!!!

What were they thinking??? Were they drunk??? Don't they know that they are not allowed to get excited about their product until a monkey can install it???

Oh, the shame! Open Source will never recover from this terrible blow to its reputation!

Thank goodness that we have journalists like Russell Pavlicek to protect us when these failures occur!

#

Re:Sensationalist Journalism :-(

Posted by: Russell Pavlicek on July 17, 2003 05:44 AM
Since you are clearly new to the Open Source movement, let me clue you in to a key element of the Open Source movement. It's called "truth."

The only way the Open Source movement survives is through truthful communication. If people begin deceiving one another, the entire fabric of the community falls apart. You cannot collaborate effectively based on lies.

Now, had the press release announced the formation of the project, a release of code, and some great potential, I would have applauded. But it didn't. It went on to say that it was all ready today for the enterprise. So I did what anyone in an IT department would do faced with that information: I downloaded it and expected to be able to test an important piece of software. Instead, I found something that could not be made to work, even through consulting of mailing lists. At the day of release, there was no serious attempt to release instructions which would allow an enterprise IT department to use the software.

This means that the press release was clearly crafted to portray something which was not true. As someone working in the Open Source arena, I have a duty to point that out. Why? Because it is a violation of the community and a threat to its continued existance.

I was prepared to write a glowing review if it matched the hype. I want to see this capability arrive so people can finally break the stranglehold that Exchange servers have in many organizations. And, if and when the developers finally make the installation truly ready for enterprise users, I have every intention of writing an appropriate review.

But I will not gloss over falsehoods. If any IT department downloaded that software with the intent of testing it based on the deception in the press release, they might throw OGo into the trash forever. That's real damage done by the press release.

If you are comfortable glossing over deception, you are free to enjoy the work of several closed source companies which regularly print untruths in their press releases. But that has no place here.

The moment the community sacrifices truth to further its goals is the moment when we become everything we considered wrong in the software world. If the community embraces deception, it embraces its own demise.

#

Re:Sensationalist Journalism :-(

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 17, 2003 09:13 AM
First, I apologize for the degree of sarcasm in my earlier post. While my underlying point has not changed, the accusatory tone of that post went too far.

Now, on to business...

> Since you are clearly new to the Open Source movement...

That is a false assumption on your part.

> let me clue you in to a key element of the Open Source movement. It's called "truth."

I agree about the need for truth.

But I disagree that your article actually delivers the truth.

The truth is more than just making factual statements. The truth requires that you put things in context, and give the reader an accurate view of the whole picture. I don't believe you achieved that. I feel that your focus on the installation problems, rather than the potential, for software that has only been Open Sourced for six day, gives readers a false impression.

For example, a couple of years ago, ZDnet used to run FUD articles that went something like this:

> Is Linux Ready for the Desktop?

> I tried to install Linux on my PC, and I ran into the following problems:
> - Problem #1.
> - Problem #2.
> - Ad infinitum.

> I never did get Linux running on my PC, but, based on all the problems I had, you should probably wait a few years before considering Linux.

In those articles, each point the author stated was factually correct, yet the overall impression they gave was false.

Of course, those articles were _intentionally_ spreading FUD. I am not accusing you of that.

But I am suggesting that you have been seriously unfair in this article, and that you have given your readers a false, negative impression about a development that is potentially very good. Hopefully, it is not your intention to put a damper on the enthusiasm of the Open Source community.

> Now, had the press release announced the formation of the project, a release of code, and some great potential, I would have applauded. But it didn't. It went on to say that it was all ready today for the enterprise. . . . This means that the press release was clearly crafted to portray something which was not true.

And that would appear to be the source of the problem. You seem to have read things into the press release that I did not, and you therefore proceeded with unrealistic expectations, and ended up disappointed.

Let's look at the actual text of the announcement:

http://lwn.net/Articles/39432/

> NEW PROJECT FORMED: OpenGroupware.org,
> AS SKYRiX OPEN SOURCES ITS GROUPWARE SERVER

So right away, we see that this is NOT an announcement about a finished product, rather, it is an announcement about the start of a new project.

> July 10, 2003 - OpenGroupware.org ('OGo') project announces its formation and the release today to the worldwide open source development community of its groupware server software.

So the project just started, and the code was just released, six days ago.

> The software provides the server components necessary for full office collaboration with the OpenOffice.org suite and various other Linux and Windows groupware clients. OGo software runs on Linux and Solaris (www.OpenGroupware.org)

A description of the purpose of the software that was Open Sourced.

> The OGo project is a fully independent open-source project, but will inter-operate with the OpenOffice.org software and other similarly open clients via open standards.

A description of how the project is positioned with respect to other projects.

> The OGo software is based initially on the contribution of the code of SKYRiX 4.1 Groupware Server, a mature product that has been in development for 7 years, and one of the earliest groupware products for the Linux operating system. The contributor, SKYRIX Software AG, is well known in Germany as a leader in Linux groupware (www.SKYRiX.com).

A description of the software's history.

By the way, I took the word "initially" as an indication that there is work to be done.

> "We are extremely excited to form OpenGroupware.org and to collaborate with OpenOffice.org to serve the open source community worldwide," said Jens Enders, president and CEO of SKYRIX Software AG. "By configuring the OpenGroupware.org server together [after install] with the OpenOffice.org office suite and other leading groupware clients, our customers will be able to implement a comprehensive and integrated collaboration environment wholly composed of free software."

A statement of why they are excited, and what they expect the software to provide.

I read the words "will be able to" as indicating that the real deliverables are in the future.

> The OGo software provides document sharing capabilities for OpenOffice.org documents and will enable users of MS Outlook (97/2000/XP), Ximian Evolution, Mozilla Calendar, OOo Glow (OpenOffice.org Groupware Project's client product), Apple's iCal and other standards-based groupware clients to collaborate.

I took the word "provides" as indicating what functions are in the software, though I suppose someone else could read it as a promise of readiness for use.

> OGo software will enable users to share calendar, address book and e-mail information; they can communicate via instant messaging, share folders, exchange documents, track changes, share a whiteboard, and browse the Web all at the same time -- all upon open Internet standards and without paying or managing cumbersome licensing fees.

A list of user functions and benefits that the software will provide. I again took the words "will enable" to indicate that the official availability is in the future.

> Says Gary Frederick, Leader of the OpenOffice.org Groupware Project: "Just to be perfectly clear, this is an MS Exchange replacement. OGo is important because it's the missing link in the open source software stack. It's the end of a decade-long effort to 'map' all the key infrastructure and standard desktop applications to free software. OGo offers users a free solution for collaboration and document management that, despite being free of charge, will far surpass the quality and level of collaboration found on Windows (through integration of MS Office, Exchange Server and SharePoint). Today marks the completion of 'OpenStack'."

I took this as a statement of why the speaker is excited about the project. He feels that this project fills the biggest remaining gap in Open Source software for the office, and he feels that the Open Source process will result in higher quality.

He does, however, use the present tense when he says, "this is an MS Exchange replacement," which I suppose could be read as a promise that the current software is already production-ready.

I also took the words, "marks the completion of 'OpenStack'," as indicating that OpenGroupware fills the last major gap in Open Source _projects_ for the office, though I suppose others could read it as indicating the "completion" of a production-ready release.

> Adds Stu Green, Managing Director of Open Source Professional Services, "The release of OGo means the OpenOffice.org suite is ready for the enterprise complete with full-featured and mature groupware solutions. These capabilities once and for all show how free software betters proprietary solutions that require licensing payments on both the client and server sides. Also, OGo provides multiple file format filters for creating, storing and sharing data in an open and flexible fashion. It's possible now to completely avoid proprietary file formats and non-standard XML throughout the desktop stack and infrastructure. Licensing fees and license management are gone. And with OOo + OGo, no remote activation is required." (www.OSPSnet.com)

That is the paragraph that contains the statement that was quoted in the article, and I can see how it could be misread.

But note that Mr. Green does NOT say that _OpenGroupware_ is ready for the enterprise.

What he does say, instead, is that with the addition of the OpenGroupware functionality, "the _OpenOffice.org_ suite is ready for the enterprise." [emphasis added]

So I again took this as a statement of the importance of the OpenGroupware functionality, and not as a statement of its production readiness.

> OGo has extensive and broad support for XML based APIs:an XML-RPC 'Webservice' API, support for SunONE XML based WCAP, support for HTTPMail/MS Exchange-based WebDAV, and finally for iCalendar files in XML notation (according to the xCal drafts). Given the XML based storage format of OpenOffice.org the OGo document storage will be able to perform feature rich team based collaboration and content management. OGo uses a WebDAV-accessible relational database management system to make document storage accessible from the OpenOffice.org office suite.

Some technical details on how it works.

> OGo is licensed under the open source dual licenses, Lesser General Public License (LGPL) and the General Public License (GPL). Libraries and components are licensed under the terms of the LGPL and applications are licensed under the GPL. For users, this means in part that the OGo software can be used, improved and redistributed at no cost. For developers, the licensing implications vary depending on the type of code contribution that is contemplated.

Some information on the license.

> If you would like to join OpenGroupware.org to contribute code, development or marketing resources to the project, please contact marketing@OpenGroupware.org.

Information on how to join the project.

Thet's the end of the actual announcement, and what I saw was an announcement about the _foundation_ of a _project_, along with information on what the project will achieve, why it is important, and why they are confident of success.

As far as the readiness of the software, I only saw a few places where it could be _misread_ to give that impression.

What I did NOT see in the announcement was an attempt to be deceptive. On that point, you are being particularly unfair, Mr. Pavlicek. The problem is your own misreading of the press release. As a result of that misreading, you took something that is very positive, and turned it into something negative (you ended up sounding like a ZDnet FUD writer), and that is why I (and others, apparently) was so upset by your article.

#

Re:Sensationalist Journalism :-(

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 17, 2003 09:55 AM
What Pavlicek provided was a reality check, not a condemnation of the project or its developers. He's saying the packaging of this product is not ready for the enterprise, not by a long shot. Now as you pointed out, the press release didn't claim this was a ship-quality product. But the *end-user* FAQ on the site *does* say that the binaries are ready to be evaluated by enterprise users, except for "a few minor problems with installation" - but it seems like the problems found by Mr. Pavlicek weren't minor, and there were more than a few. I didn't see anything on the site marking the release as alpha, beta, developer-only, or early-adapter code.

Constructive criticism may sting, but it should be welcomed. Bug reports just don't have the same impact -- they aren't seen by customers, and they can be put aside by developers. Pavlicek obviously spent many hours trying to get this to work so he isn't trolling, he actually went to the trouble of documenting the problems he found, which is a fair amount of work. Some corporate users, after experiencing the same frustrations, might give up on OSS altogether and decide to stick with Microsoft. Is that fair, considering the quality debacle of Windows 3.1 etc? No it isn't, but it's human nature.

"Be thankful for the customers that complain. Most unhappy customers will take their business to your competitors and you'll never hear from them again". -- source unknown

#

Re:Sensationalist Journalism :-(

Posted by: Russell Pavlicek on July 17, 2003 12:55 PM
Now try reading the second half of that press release (from "We are extremely excited to form") the way a number of IT journalists clearly did (from the articles I saw).

Question: What words have to be changed if this were an announcement of current capabilities?

Answer: None. Not a single word needs to be changed to be an announcement of present capabilities.

The handful of uses of future tense talk about what users will do. Obviously, they are not doing already, since the code has just been released.

And then focus in on the quotes, which are designed to be used by journalists in pieces discussing the project:

"Just to be perfectly clear, this is an MS Exchange replacement. OGo is important because it's the missing link in the open source software stack. It's the end of a decade-long effort to 'map' all the key infrastructure and standard desktop applications to free software."

"Today marks the completion of 'OpenStack'."

"The release of OGo means the OpenOffice.org suite is ready for the enterprise complete with full-featured and mature groupware solutions."

"It's possible now to completely avoid proprietary file formats and non-standard XML throughout the desktop stack and infrastructure. Licensing fees and license management are gone."

It's the end. It's completed. It's ready. It's possible now. Those are the messages intended to ring in your ears.

It's a horrible stretch to say these powerful statements in the present tense are all describing the future. No, they are all phrased in the present for a reason -- to make the reader think it's a done deal.

They should have cut the press release in two. The first part (and the last couple of paragraphs) would have made a fine press release last week. The second half might make a good press release sometime in the (hopefully near) future when the software is an enterprise-ready solution.

Remember as well this is talking about ENTERPRISE READY software. That's supposed to a much higher standard than just "it works sort of if you mess with it long enough." It's also why so many people in the Open Source world have attacked Redmond's "enterprise" claims for years. Many over the years have attacked their software as being too kludgy for the enterprise. Now is not the time to set "it works, sort of" as the definition of "enterprise."

Explain away statements all you want. Just be aware that every time you do, you chip away at the foundation of the community. The Open Source standard for communication has ALWAYS been higher than that in popular culture. In the US at least, we accept the fact that our politicians lie to us. The moment that we accept fair sounding untruths in the Open Source movement, we're dead. Without truthful communications, collaboration dies quickly. And the other guys win.

#

Re:Sensationalist Journalism :-(

Posted by: Helge Hess on July 21, 2003 05:07 AM
I think a problem is that you mix up packaging/support and development/source in a single unit. Each one certainly is important, yet unrelated.

When Microsoft would release the Exchange source code, you certainly wouldn't argue the way you did, even if it no packaging would be provided.
Similiary you certainly wouldn't argue that the Linux kernel is immature, even though it can only be installed in a useful way in conjunction with a distribution.

So the statements made in the announcement are certainly true, as it was for the OGo project. OGo is a *source* project and provides a mature codebase which support and development companies can (and will) work on to produce actual solutions.

PS: RedHat provided proper packages a few days after OGo was released.

#

OT: Chandler

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 17, 2003 10:01 AM
Any word on the progress of Kapor's Chandler project?

#

This story has been archived. Comments can no longer be posted.