A glossary for ecology of value

March 20th, 2012 by Gabriele Ruffatti

When I deal with ecology of value, I use some terms that may appear a little dark, such as software lock-in, vendor lock-in, pure open source business/delivery model, project (and product) centric business model, customer satisfaction, community participation and more.

Providing you with a real glossary would be a demanding effort, probably returning uncertain results: any new definition is tricky and may open unfocused debates, and some sentences may look as words for a dream book.

Therefore, I’ll give you real examples, which will help me to hit the mark.

Here you can find a section dedicated to the general FAQs on SpagoBI suite, pointing out the meaning of many of the above-mentioned terms, according to this project. Have a nice reading!

This may be a good provision for your journey towards a full adoption of the ecology of value.

Last but not least, send us your feedback, provide us with new samples, add your own story!

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Ecology of Value | No Comments »

No price, no value?

March 19th, 2012 by Gabriele Ruffatti

Some days ago I posted “Buy less, spend better”, highlighting one of the main benefits of adopting SpagoBI suite or, in general terms, of choosing an open source product adopting the pure open source delivery model.

Now you can argue that a product with no price has no value either. If you believe it, this short presentation will give you some answers.

No price doesn’t mean no value. Monetary value exists (money saved or better spent by purchasers or money earned by sellers) and non-monetary value exists as well. As for SpagoBI suite, its value for free comes from its being state-of-the-art software, from its completeness, flexibility and innovation, from its model avoiding both software and vendor lock-in. However, its main free value comes from the openness of SpagoBI team to new collaborations: collaboration is everything in open source. Even more, you get a great value also when you spend your money: you save your money since you don’t purchase any software license, but you also make your price according to your needs. With SpagoBI, you pay for the services when you need them, how long you need them.

Mainly, if you actively collaborate, you are not just using SpagoBI according to the real open source spirit; you are a member of the community, you are part of the project, you are in SpagoBI story, you yourself are SpagoBI! Be SpagoBI today!

By the way, don’t think I’m going crazy. This doesn’t only apply to SpagoBI community, which is just a sample here. This applies every time you decide to look beyond achieving immediate results, every time you embrace the spirit of the community and you try to give more. It’s the real open source approach, when it fosters freedom of software. It’s the path that leads to building the ecology of value.

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Ecology of Value | No Comments »

Buy less, spend better

February 23rd, 2012 by Gabriele Ruffatti

The SpagoWorld initiative vision focuses on the sustainable development of mission-critical applications for enterprises and organizations.

It’s all about project-oriented solutions, balancing the weights in the development phase.

In other words: it’s about asking customers to buy less and spend better.

Some days ago, I had a glance at a news referencing the world’s 50 most innovative companies in 2012. My attention was attracted by Patagonia, ranking 14th, according to the following reason: “for selling more by encouraging customers to buy less”. (To read the full story, among various posts, you can read this one, October 2001)

Immediately I thought: wohw, what a nice slogan! It’s what I usually say. SpagoBI, SpagoWorld flagship project, is a good example! Am I right?

Mutatis Mutandis

Patagonia is a goods company dealing with a consumer market and fostering an environmental initiative.

SpagoBI is a work unit (SpagoBI Competency Center ) of a large IT company,  producing an open source suite dealing with Business Intelligence , a very complex, crowded and enterprise-level market in the IT domain. Moreover, SpagoBI fosters an ecological approach, where ecology refers to ecology–of-value , as a new collaborative and sustainable business growth, rather than to the natural environment.

Notwithstanding, both push the same message asking customers to buy less, just what they really need (and not what they just desire), and consequently spending better. (Finally, if the side-effect for Patagonia is selling more, I’m happy to see SpagoBI even selling more services in time as well).

What’s the reason?

SpagoBI is the only entirely Open Source Business Intelligence suite, offering all BI capabilities in open source (more than 20 analytical and operational engines, some of which are totally unique in the information intelligence domain), with a complete availability of a stable and mature software code, as a free software at no charge.

SpagoBI particular pure open source business model eliminates licensing sales, separating the rights to use the software from the sale of supporting services, avoiding both software lock-in (no customer obligation to buy) and vendor lock-in. This is the perfect fit for companies and organizations willing to buy less and spend better, investing  budget in the purchase of professional services and maintenance supporting the development of their business application software.

In the BI context, many times I see discussions about the capability of tools to fit users’ requirements. Nowadays, in a BI linkedin group is still active a never ending discussion referring to the following question: Why are so much of the business intelligence discussions about tools and not on how to get the right intelligence based on the requirements of the customers and how to use it?

My comment is obvious. A tool (a suite, I mean) is necessary. But from the beginning, SpagoBI suite has pushed the project-oriented approach as stated in SpagoBI vision: “Your Project is more valuable than our products: we believe that a good product can actually improve your project, if it promotes a project-oriented solution, balancing the weights in the development phase. Too often, the project development is focused on the project adaptation to a costly product. On the other hand, a project-oriented solution is designed so as to realize customized applications, focusing on the project development. This way, it enhances the project start-up, thanks to a new ratio among development measurement, cost and quality of results, unlike many current solutions, based on proprietary products and characterized by price discrepancies”.

Organizations need a good tool/suite, responding to end-user requirements and their strategic goals, instead of to vendor’s expectations.

In conclusion:

Customers can really buy less (no product-licenses at least), and spend better (in integration, in the development responding to their analytical needs) choosing open source software products (and an everlasting open product protecting software freedom, when SpagoBI).

Tags: , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Ecology of Value | No Comments »

Gartner quotes SpagoBI in the 2012 MQ for BI Platforms report

February 17th, 2012 by Gabriele Ruffatti

Gartner’s Magic Quadrant for Business Intelligence Platform, February 2012, is out.

This year major OS BI-related vendors as Actuate (BIRT), Jaspersoft, Pentaho are in; SpagoBI, the only pure OS BI product is quoted.

As the SpagoWorld initiative founder, I’m very proud to see SpagoBI suite – SpagoWorld flagship project – included in the Gartner’s report, even if it does not appear in the Magic Quadrant.

Gartner is not a recognized Open Source observer (especially from the OSS actors’ point of view) and the report refers to the whole vendors’ BI market, which are mainly proprietary. However, Gartner is a prominent IT research organization, very authoritative in the industrial market to which main BI customers refer to, looking for advocacy.

Despite this, I’m excited to know that Gartner, after a first mention of SpagoBI in the “Who’s Who in Open-Source Business Intelligence” report in 2008, has decided to include SpagoBI in its BI MQ 2012 report, somehow assuming that SpagoBI deserves the mention because it is a mature and reliable alternative to proprietary software.

Gartner says, among other things:

“SpagoBI is a 100% open-source BI platform sponsored by Engineering Group, one of Italy’s leading IT consultancies” …” SpagoBI is freely available, with no license fee. Consulting or support charges are separated from free software availability, with no user lock-in and no customer obligation to buy.” …” Clients indicate that they select SpagoBI for performance considerations, followed by license cost and implementation costs/efforts”.

[To read the full report, please contact your Gartner representative]

Why am I so excited? Because SpagoWorld initiative works and is well delivering!

First of all, assume that:

  • business intelligence is a very crowded and competitive market
  • the adoption of a pure open source strategy to address this market necessarily gives rise to an industrial comparison of any OS BI suite with other commercial products
  • a pure open source adoption is complex by itself and building a BI suite, for business purposes in the information domain, shifts this complexity to a second level.

This year major OS BI-related vendors are inside the Magic Quadrant. I’m saying “OS BI related-vendor” because the report highlights that Actuate, Jaspersoft and Pentaho follow an open-source strategy, with some differences, but after all they sell their commercial products (i.e.: proprietary products. For a deeper insight, I’ve already posted about the comparison between open core andpre open source business models).

This confirms the following statement: “SpagoBI is the only 100% open source, complete and flexible BI suite“.

Even though SpagoBI fulfils Gartner’s main criteria (“a BI platform is a software platform that delivers the 14 capabilities”, according to the Gartner’s definition), the fact that SpagoBI doesn’t sell any software license partially justifies the difficulties encountered by SpagoBI in achieving the second Gartner’s criteria, which would allow the suite to be included into the Magic Quadrant: “vendors must generate at least $15 million in BI-related software license revenue annually”.

Moreover, the understandable comparison between SpagoBI Competency Center of Engineering Group – the editor of SpagoBI suite – and other BI vendors is very challenging. Despite the fact that SpagoBI stands at the same level as major vendors thanks to its functional completeness and its innovation, the suite leads the BI analysts to face some evaluation parameters which are not the usual ones, suggesting different metrics that they probably wouldn’t have otherwise adopted because in contrast with traditional rules which BI customers are particularly fond of.

Some examples follow:

  • no licensing sales, with the consequent separation of the rights to use the software from the sale of supporting services (i.e.: both no software lock-in and no vendor lock-in), without any need to manage the purchasing costs, versus an expected confidence in the vendor’s support granted by the price paid with the licenses and maintenance purchases;
  • a complete software availability fostering wide integration, adaptation and flexibility capabilities, versus a strong control over the product by the vendor;
  • a different brand reputation of the editor based on the type of products it delivers, mainly qualified by the amount of support and professional services it sales, versus the brand reputation of the vendor mainly based on the amount of its software license-related revenues
  • a supporting business ecosystem-based model, driven by a specific working unit (Competency Center) belonging to a large systems integrator sharing its business with various local integrators, versus the traditional channel-based business model involving local OEM/VAR and resellers.

On the other hand, the previous points highlight some peculiar characteristics of SpagoBI approach to the BI market, marking a difference and pointing out many opportunities both for BI customers willing to enter in the open market era in an innovative way and for those who want or must accept – under the pressure of budget scarcity – the challenge of a new economical model, even keeping a traditional approach.

This is the challenge that SpagoBI is facing now through an ever-improving process.

I’m the witness of an increasing interest of the market in SpagoBI, aware of the fact that this market sharing will never be able to compete with major BI vendors.

Nonetheless, I’m very proud to see that someway Gartner points out to the market that SpagoBI can make this possible, confirming that SpagoWorld initiative is well delivering.

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Open Source Business Intelligence | 1 Comment »

Radical Open Source – Licensing and MPL 2.0

January 17th, 2012 by Gabriele Ruffatti

Is Mozilla Foundation fostering a more radical open source approach?

To read my thoughts on open source licenses, have a look at my previous posts here and here .

By introducing the MPL 2.0 license , the Foundation probably intended to work for their community, even though, as a side-effect, they have done much more than this.

Interestingly enough, also because he’s an OSI director,  Simon Phipps has concluded his post focusing on the new MPL 2.0 license with the following statement:  : “I welcome the MPLv2 as a positive contribution to unifying the common cause of many open source developers. Well done, Mozilla!”

On the other hand, Richard Fontana, welcoming MPL 2.0 too, is more prudent about MPL 2.0 adoption  saying that “despite its merit, I do not expect MPL 2.0 to see wide adoption as an open source license outside the Mozilla project universe “

Time ago, Luis Villa highlighted its compatibility as “one of the biggest features of MPL 2.0” .

The new MPL 2.0 is a simpler, shorter, understandable (also by non legal people), modern license favouring code reuse and redistribution because it solves major compatibility issues.

This process is in sync with the revision of other open source licenses. In this regard, see the comment of CC.org. CC.org is revising its own license toward the new CC 4.0. Although CC.org doesn’t recommend its use for software, its revision process includes, among others, the following goal: “maximize interoperability between CC licenses and other licenses to reduce friction within the commons, promote standards and stem license proliferation”.

MPL 2.0 is an open source/free software license: as a weak copyleft license, it protects the freedom of the code, also when used for commercial purposes.

The side-effect of the MPL 2.0 release, including the best positions of various open source developers, can be considered as a significant step forward in the reduction of OSS license proliferation, toward a broader openness adoption.

Then, I confirm Simon’s opinion: “it could be a significant step for a unified OSS licensing approach”, (I add) preserving the identity of different OSS communities at the same time. Well done again, Mozilla!

Tags: , ,
Posted in Radical Openness | No Comments »

« Older Entries