Archive for February, 2011

25
Feb

No matter what you call it, a rat is still a rat…

Do you smell a rat?  I do.  Actually, I smell many.

In the past few months, as success of open source in several markets has sunk in, a number of players in those markets have started to behave very badly.

I am not talking about the old, everyday proprietary vendor FUD – that’s an old story, and has become painfully cliché by now.  FUD has been part of the software game for a long time, but it has certainly lost a lot of efficiency against open source – only the most laggard still dare to call open source “trialware for non-strategic projects”.  Maybe the numerous deals they’ve lost in the past 18 months to enterprise open source vendors have forced everyone else to revise their position…?

I am actually talking about several categories of rats:

  • those who have adopted “faux-pen source” strategies (from the French “faux” which means fake, and “open source”, which means… great!) after attacking open source
  • those who continue to attack open source for their own benefit
  • and – how could we forget? – those who walk away from open source

In the first category (faux-pen source), you find the “rats” who have spent years claiming that “free stuff” provides no value and is a mere copy of traditional software.  They mocked users of open source software who were “getting what they paid for”.  Now, all of a sudden, “free” is the new great thing, and they’ve jumped on the bandwagon and released free versions of their own.

Problem is, it’s only free as in “free beer”. And guess what: it’s not even really that.  All they’ve done is repurpose their trial version to entice new users to their functional, expensive product.

It’s definitely not free as in “free speech”.  This kind of software lacks the fundamental freedoms of open source (freedom to use, freedom to modify, freedom to redistribute).  And, subsequently, it lacks the openness of the entire supporting ecosystem of open source solutions: no free extensions/connectors contributed by the community, no free support via the forums, no free access to the bug tracking system, etc.

Even worse, there are no guarantees for the long run.  If the faux-pen source vendor decides to stop supporting its “free” version, what happens to someone who has gone to production with it?  Tough luck… Hold on, I see – maybe the vendor will accept their money to upgrade them to the paying version?

Real open source solutions do not present these issues.  Why?  Because their open nature invites the community to contribute, and the open source license model guarantees their indefinite availability (via forks if needed).

In the second category (the ones who keep going after open source), you find all sorts of “rats” who attack without real arguments, mostly to get visibility.  For example, I can think of a SaaS vendor who enjoys picking on “the lies” of open core, but who will carefully avoid any discussion about who owns the data stored in their SaaS application, and what happens to this data (and their code logic!) if they go belly up.

(Which “lies” would they be referring to, BTW? The vast majority of open core vendors are very clear about what is free and what is commercial, as highlighted by Matt Aslett in his open core transparency test).

This is all marketing – pick a target, throw some mud at it, and if some of it sticks you may become a hero.  So far, it’s not working…

Then, you have the vendors who (quietly) walk away from open source.  Some “rats” choose to ride the open source wave when they start, but they are not really open source.  Maybe they are from the licensing standpoint, but not culturally.  So it doesn’t work out, and at the end of the day, it’s too costly for them to have the constraints of open source without getting its rewards.  So they walk away and go back to being proprietary.  Some of them are successful (at being quiet, anyway), some less so.  But it can’t be good for their image in the community… that is, unless they never had a community.

OK, so the vendors who realize they cannot sustain an open source model are not directly attacking open source (although… since they are now proprietary vendors, they probably will resort to good ol’ FUD).   I’ll still call them rats, because they use open source as a launch pad to get initial traction, but fail to deliver on their promise to the community.

That’s lots of rodents out there.  We need to stock up on rat poison. Anyone knows a good brand?

Yves

22
Feb

About MDM, Data Warehouse and Innovation

Gartner recently released several studies that confirm our perception of our market. The first study is dedicated to Master Data Management (MDM) and states that “MDM is important in a tough economy, and more important in growth”. John Radcliffe, Vice President of Research at Gartner commented in EFY Times, that “Today, most organizations juggle multiple sets of business and data applications across corporate, regional and local systems. At the same time, customers are demanding faster and more complex responses from organizations, leading to an inconsistency that hinders the organization’s ability to measure and move within the market. With MDM, CIOs can create a unified view of existing data, leading to greater enterprise agility, simplified integration and, ultimately, improved profitability.”

According to Gartner, in 2010, the MDM market was valued at $1.5 billion, with 14% growth from 2009. The analyst firm predicts that this growth will continue to increase (18% CAGR), reaching $2.9 billion by 2014, “even through the worst of the global recession”.  The company also adds that “by 2015, 10 percent of packaged MDM implementations will be delivered as software as a service (SaaS) in the public cloud” and particularly recommends it to enterprises that lack in-house skills. Gartner confirms what we have always maintained: MDM is pivotal for every Data Management project.

The second study identifies “Nine Key Data Warehousing Trends for the CIO in 2011 and 2012”. According to Gartner, “The data warehouse is set to remain a key component of the IT infrastructure (…) and as the demand for business intelligence (BI) and the wider category of business analytics increases, optimization, flexible designs and alternative strategies will become more important.” If the data warehouse is still a strategic component of the IT infrastructure, so is the loading of the “enterprise’s largest data repository”! And loading the data warehouse means optimizing data and application integration. Here, I see good perspectives for Talend: with the acquisition of Sopera, we are now able to work on the synergies of Data and Application Integration which will help enterprises optimize data circulation in their information system, and ultimately, thrive.

I will wrap up this post by mentioning another good prospective article, “5 Paths To The New Data Integration”, published by Seth Grimes on Information Week. This article begins with a statement that many analysts acknowledge today, “Data integration will be a top story in information technology in 2011”. The author explains that in addition to ETL and ELT technologies, the market will offer innovations that will help to better respond to clients’ needs, while enhancing user-friendliness: mashups, semantic integration, and data profiles.

Innovation has always been at the heart of our strategy. For example, Talend was the first vendor to release a unified data management platform, uniting data integration, data quality and master data management (MDM) within a single solution. Our efforts were noted by awards such as the Red Herring Top 100 Europe Tech Startup and the 2010 Innovation Award of the Open World Forum. This kind of articles and studies confirm that we are on the right path, and encourage us to continue!

Bertrand

09
Feb

Big Data & Analytics: moving toward a global strategy of information management

Analytics is becoming increasingly embedded in businesses and has become one of the main tools used to achieve a sustainable competitive advantage.  The number of Business Intelligence and Business Analytics projects continues to grow and some experts are now talking about the development of a third generation of BI systems.

But how do the companies use analytics to increase their knowledge and implement tangible actions?  MIT tackled this question and the answers appear in an article published by MIT Sloan Management Review entitled, “Big Data, Analytics and the Path from Insights to Value”.  This article examines the findings of the first survey of 3,000 decision makers from 30 industries and more than 100 countries, conducted in partnership with the IBM Institute for Business Value.

The findings of this survey are so rich and varied, I recommend that you read the entire article.  However, here are some of the points I noted while reading it:

  • The most dynamic companies use analytics up to 5 times more than other companies.
  • Obstacles to adopting analytic systems no longer exist in the data (how to collect data, how to guarantee data reliability, etc.), but rather in the company culture and managers (how to use analytics to improve business).
  • The future of analytics lies in the new technology of data visualization, semantic video analysis and social media analysis.

MIT also suggests following a five recommendation approach to make the most of a company’s analytic programs and quickly create value: think big from the start and concentrate on the biggest opportunities, start by asking the right questions rather than searching the data available, load information in the business processes, make BI features coexist rather than replace them, and plan an information governance strategy.

Today, according to MIT, data quality issues should no longer pose a problem for businesses: the technology exists and it is mature.  Therefore, we should focus on building a global strategy for information management, describing the why and the wherefore of analyzing the available information, to define actions that will drive the creation of value.  As we can see, the future of BI and analytics offers new perspectives that will help businesses grow and develop.

In conclusion, here is new evidence of the openness of public data: the City of Paris just announced that all of its databases (green spaces, election results, waste collection, etc.) will now be available to the public.  This should generate the creation of many new services for residents and tourists.  So, to sum up the article by a leading Business Intelligence expert in France, “We will be talking about Big Data a lot in 2011.”

Bertrand