SpikeSource, open source integrators, launch publicly

Discussions

News: SpikeSource, open source integrators, launch publicly

  1. SpikeSource has announced their public launch of their core product stacks and related services, ISV and open source developer programs, and an information services program, among other things. SpikeSource provides 7 "stacks" incorporating 63 open source projects on 6 different platforms for use by clients, as well as software solutions to keep installations up to date.

    The SpikeSource enterprise offering is comprised of the SpikeSource Core Stack plus a complete range of support services from basic installation support to unlimited, ongoing support of mission-critical systems. Qualified open source projects can receive free integration testing and feedback, with current test suites being composed of more than 22000 tests.

    SpikeSource offers a set of management tools that allow IT departments to continually asses and manage their open source assets. SpikeSource Asset Manager (SAM) is for probing open source components, notification services deliver alerts about updates and patches, and storage.

    SpikeSource information services are designed to give developers and enterprise IT professionals important, up-to-date information about open source technologies, integration and licensing, culled from blogs, news items, and bug reports about the projects covered.

    SpikeSource is also announcing partnerships with various partners, including JBoss, O'Reilly Media, Black Duck Software, MySQL, Cognizant, and others.

    For more information, see SpikeSource.com.

    Threaded Messages (13)

  2. That is the biggest bunch of marketdroid gobbledegook gibberish I have read in a while. In bloglines it only had the first paragraph and I just _had_ to come and see the rest. And it did not dissapoint.
  3. Where has everyone gone?[ Go to top ]

    Why is there such rubbish on TSS these days?

    The volume of postings has become tiny, and the quality dropped off.

    Where has everyone gone now that TSS appears to be no more?
  4. This post isn't THAT bad. It gives us an idea of how companies are trying to build business models around open source - and their attempts do have an effect on server side technologies.

    I agree that SpikeSource has a lot of marketing mumbo jumbo on it. It really reminds me of the dot com bubble, copy someone else's great idea, and scale up very fast, try to look like a big company, and hope somebody buys your product. Personally, I can't imagine companies going to a third party source for stacks and support, but then again, I thought Ebay was a stupid idea and I was very wrong.
  5. What would you prefer?[ Go to top ]

    Guys listen, marketing mambo jumbo indeed, yet I think their point is valid.

    Let's say you're an IT professional, and is accountable to the performance of your department, team, or whatever.

    Now let's say you need someone to give you service on something that is open source – server, OS or whatever.

    Now who would you prefer as your supplier – The Community (with all due respect) or a professional person or company that is accountable and enables you to wring necks if something goes wrong?

    Like my grandpa used to say – "if your butt is on the line, make sure it is damn well protected, preferably by another"
  6. What would you prefer?[ Go to top ]

    Why would I take service from a company that has
    1. No IP(intellectual Property) over the source.
    2. Has not contributed to the Open Source product
    3. Is not really commited to a Product in the stack.

    Why would'nt I go to
    1. JBOSS for hibernate support
    2. Novell for Suse.
    3. Mysql for mysql.
  7. Why would'nt I go to1. JBOSS for hibernate support2. Novell for Suse.3. Mysql for mysql.
    One of the selling points for commercial product vendors is the level of support and integration provided.

    The fact remains that, one way or the other there IS a stack. Either one buys a complete stack, or buys assurrance that the stack is certified (most commercial J2EE server vendors do this).

    And, of course, one could always go to individual OSS providers and build the stack. Anyone that has tried these stacks know fully well that there will always be integration issues. Some JDBC call or an SQL data type behaving different frome xpectations with Mysql, or some servlet semantics not proper in JBoss or a JVM issue on Suse.. and more such. And for most It groups, it may not be worthwhile investing in the resoucres required to "certify" and "manage" an OSS based stack.

    Thats where the likes of SpikeSource comes in. If there is true value proposition in OSS based stacks- either entirely OSS or a combo of OSS & commercial products (Pramati is part of SpikeSource kitty)- then there is an opportunityto certify and manage these stacks as a service. This is not for geek ventures where the thrill is in exploring. This is for enterprise IT organizations that want to adopt OSS based stacks for thier IT use, but need the "assurrance" and "support" for the stack.

    Cheers,
    Ramesh
    - Go ESB!!
  8. What would you prefer?[ Go to top ]

    My point exactly - even with open source, go to the pros.

    I, like almost every other bill paying employee, would not risk my position by putting too many resources on integrating and testing myself community open source (again: all due respect, some of my best friends, etc.) in my department.

    I am all for open source – though I'm not a tech guy I do appreciate the potential and benefit of open source stuff for IT departments, users and the world in general – but as a professional administrator, I will not take the risk of "putting too many eggs in one basket" – the one of community open source.

    It is professionalism and accountability I seek. Products, tools and applications that operate well, operate well with each other, have a neck behind them to wring (or to slap cheerfully when everything is working fine ;) )

    Open source tools that are being backed by a solid vendor, answer our needs (especially integration issues) and don’t cost us fortune sound like a reasonable solution for me.
  9. What would you prefer?[ Go to top ]

    Why would I take service from a company that has1. No IP(intellectual Property) over the source.2. Has not contributed to the Open Source product3. Is not really commited to a Product in the stack.Why would'nt I go to1. JBOSS for hibernate support2. Novell for Suse.3. Mysql for mysql.

    Some people/companies don't have the time/ability/knowledge to put a stack together. I have seen it time and again. That is why MS and IBM and the others do so much business.

    I believe this is an excellent idea. How many companies support the Microsoft or IBM stack? Lots. I have been contemplating this, but I am only one man limited by time. :(
  10. What would you prefer?[ Go to top ]

    Why would'nt I go to
    1. JBOSS for hibernate support
    2. Novell for Suse.
    3. Mysql for mysql.

    If you're smart enough to know where to go for support, you probably don't need support. Also, "The Industry Observer" just observes, never buys. ;-)

    Why people would pay Novell for Linux builds and JBoss for Tomcat builds is beyond me, but if a bean-counter can get the same build+support for less money from company X than from Novell or JBoss, then they have a financial responsibility to go with the less expensive one.

    SpikeSource exists because people found out how much money JBoss was charging to support "free" software, and realized that they could undercut JBoss by 30% or even 50% and still be very profitable.

    It's just business.

    Peace,

    Cameron Purdy
    Tangosol, Inc.
    Coherence: Cluster your POJOs!
  11. Valued added[ Go to top ]

    I checked their sowftware stacks, test results and the information that they compiled about each project.

    Even though the idea sounds good, they have a long way ahead of them, they have a lot of things to build, beginning with their brand, they are unknown and as today I could say, I can do in house the same things that they are doing, they need to convince me, why I should go to them and get the same stuff that is available out there?

    Currently they have just packaged things together that are in the wild and ran the unit tests that come along, that's not enough, that doesn't tell me "integration" picture that they are trying to sell, if that's the case, then what do they bring to the table, what is their "value added"?
  12. Re: Valued added[ Go to top ]

    Currently they have just packaged things together that are in the wild and ran the unit tests that come along, that's not enough, that doesn't tell me "integration" picture that they are trying to sell, if that's the case, then what do they bring to the table, what is their "value added"?

    The law of unintended consequences says that if you don't test your change across the breadth of the system, you're probably going to break something you didn't expect. We encountered this ourselves a few weeks ago when an update to bind broke our build environment. I don't doubt that bind was tested before being pushed, but the point is that no-one should anticipate such an interrelationship and so the testing didn't catch this more complex problem.

    So I agree, we need to do more than unit testing.

    What we're trying to do is advance the current practice of testing. Ourselves, we test the entire stack in combinations with every component patch. Not local unit tests alone. Do we have enough cross-component tests? No. We're augementing them with the applications that would use the stack - it is after all the application behaviour we want to protect.

    Hence: our test upload service, and our start at a definition of portable test manifest that allows the automated assembly of tests in cross-component cross-platform suites. Hence also the more advanced versions of that service we offer to customers. With every component change, we run tests of the applications folks want to use.

    For the record, in case it wasn't obvious, I am employed at SpikeSource.

    glen
    blog.glen-martin.com
  13. Valued added[ Go to top ]

    they have a lot of things to build, beginning with their brand, they are unknown and as today I could say,

    Open Source comes with a product first and then a company. Spike source is a company first then a product.

    Build a COOOOOOOL Product first then if people like it build a company around it. Not the other way around.
  14. I would be more positive on such companies. It seems more and more companies like spikesource are trying to propose "integrated stacks" (look at http://opensource.architectures.tv/open-source-0.-Integrated-open-source-stacks-rubrique848.html ).

    From a pure corporate IT point of view, having just one contact, certifying the integration of a open source stack like a software vendor would do, is interesting.

    My concerns would be more execution related: will these stack providers able to deliver a really integrated, certified, stack, for all the application needed to have a real open source strategy (the only case where I see companies BUYING support for their open source tools). Will the price still be competitive against software vendors?

    And what leven of engagement/liability Spikesource and others are providing? They are small players....