OStatic

We've recently written about potentially far-reaching moves by the U.S. government to switch significant parts of its internal software infrastructure to open source. First, the news came out that Whitehouse.gov is now based on the open source Drupal content management system (which OStatic runs on too), then the U.S. Department of Defense announced its plans to move to open source software components and platforms.

When the news broke about Whitehouse.gov and Drupal (and the Obama administration has indicated intent to run other government sites with Drupal), my first thought was that Acquia, which provides commercial support for Drupal, might see some valuable support contracts from the government. InfoWorld's Savio Rodrigues takes the idea one step further, though, and I'm inclined to agree with him.

Recently I got to talking open source with a friend of mine who has worked in the proprietary database market, especially at Sybase, for several years. He made a few interesting observations during the conversation. For example, we talked about open source competition in databases, and he said a few good things about MySQL, but also said that the proprietary databases often outdo MySQL based on just a few small features, and also commitment to legacy systems that many companies have. His take on what Oracle might do with MySQL is that it might treat it as an open source on-ramp to its own proprietary databases, but that Oracle will have to keep MySQL like WordPad --Microsoft's text editing application, which falls far short of the features found in Microsoft Word.

When we got down to discussing business models for successful commercial open source companies, my friend especially liked the Red Hat model of providing support and services for free software, which has provided the company with substantial financial success, and also consistency. There are quite a few companies following the Red Hat model, and there are also signs appearing that that model will end up immeasurably improving important open source software applications and platforms--not just business bottom lines.

Even as the economy has stayed in the doldrums, Red Hat continues to post strong quarterly financial results. Late Wednesday, the company reported first quarter revenues of $174.4 million, up 11 percent from $156.6 million a year earlier. Profits were also up, with quarterly earnings of $18.5 million, or 10 cents a share, up from a profit of $17.3 million, or 8 cents a share, for the same quarter last year.

Red Hat?s growth is driven in part by our ability to help enterprise customers save money in a challenging IT spending environment, said CEO Jim Whitehurst. Our open source solutions drive new capabilities, efficiencies and functionality into the mission critical infrastructure of our customers.? Red Hat's total cash, cash equivalents and investments as of May 31, 2009 sat at a whopping $884.5 million, which is more evidence of the investment savvy that Whitehurst and Red Hat's top brass have.

One of the biggest problems in delivering open source software solutions comes after you've made an application available. How do you support it? Support is a huge cost center for commercial software companies that provide it, and is often prohibitive for open source developers. That leaves end users figuring out how to support themselves.

Could automated software support solutions help? The jury's still out, but I was interested in today's announcement from SourceLabs regarding new Linux and Java self-support tools. They're aimed at getting people who use open source software tools to share information within a software environment so that known problems can be identified and solved.