Date post: | 06-May-2015 |
Category: |
Technology |
Upload: | webinos-project |
View: | 945 times |
Download: | 1 times |
Ecosystems & Openness
George Voulgaris, Ph.D. VisionMobile Ltd
Agenda
HTML5: Web as the new walled garden and why the web is waiting for a new leader
Ecosystems battle across 4-screens Experience roaming drives user lock-in, cross sales and engagement
Open Governance Driving innovation through openness and meritocracy
Sources
© VisionMobile 2011 | www.visionmobile.com
1
Open Governance Index
http://visionmobile.com
http://webinos.org
Downloads • Industry landscape, governance, licensing and IPR frameworks • Target Platforms, target Requirements and Platform IPRs • Landscape Analysis Update
HTML5: Web as the new walled garden and why the web is waiting for a new leader
HTML5 is pitched as the future of mobile apps
…but what is HTML5, really? • A set of browser specs by 2 standard groups: W3C and
WHAT – WHAT WG - Web Hypertext Application Technologies – The WHAT working group specs merge into W3C specs
• Brings capabilities of web apps closer to those of native apps
– UI tools, off-line storage, 2D graphics, plugin-free video/audio – geo location, speed and communication
Many benefactors, but no clear leader all pushing and hyping HTML5 for their own unrelated reasons
• Apple looking to move the web away from Flash
• Google searching for more ways to commoditize complements
• Facebook aiming to break-down Apple/Google silos and distance Adobe
• Microsoft to onboard web developers onto Windows 8
• Mobile operators hoping to regain control lost to native platforms
• Qualcomm aiming to create a competitive advantage for its chips
• Brands looking use web as a low-cost way to go cross-device and cross-screen
• Adobe aiming to sell tools that facilitate web-to-native hybrid apps
But HTML5 is just past the peak of expectations
• Fragmentation across platforms (iOS, Android, BlackBerry, Windows Phone) • Challenged to compete with native user experience • Lack of distribution channels and monetisation for web apps
HTML5 is fragmented across platforms
324
273
273
268
235
189
174
138
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
iOS 5.1
BlackBerry OS 7
Android 4.0
Bada 2.0
Android 3.2
Android 2.3
Amazon Silk 1.0
Windows Phone 7.5 (Mango)
HTML5 Test Score
Source: html5test.com, April 2012.
Andrew Betts of Assanka on app.ft.com: It took a full-time team of 3 developers at Assanka 8 months to launch on iPad, and that team a further 4 months to bug-fix the iPad and ready for distribution to Android tables.
October 2011 hLp://www.tomhume.org/
HTML5 is a technology lacking key ingredients unable to compete with iOS and Android platforms
Platform ingredients
Software foundations
Developer ecosystem Monetisation Distribution Retailing
✔ = ✖ ✖ ✖ HTML5
fragmented platform
always a step behind native
complex tool-chain
islands of developers
using common language,
but different API sets
will depend on app store
waiting for a leader Facebook? Google? Other ?
Key ingredients
Google & FB are building complete platforms
adding missing ingredients on top of HTML5 enabling technology Software foundations
Developer ecosystem Monetisation Distribution Retailing
application runtime, developer
tool-chain, & platform APIs
Developers building and
publishing apps around the
software foundation
micropayments, ad networks
and settlement
app distribution to end users
through SaaS or devices
app discovery, promotion,
placement, search &
recommendations
HTML5 with Chrome API
web developers Google Checkout PC, Mac, Android, Chrome OS
Chrome Web Store
HTML5 with Facebook APIs
Web and Flash developers
FB Credits 900M Facebook users
FB app recommendations
HTML5 browsers (fragmentation)
Fragmented --- --- ---
HTML5 may end up a yet another walled garden despite the promise of openness
Ecosystems battle Experience roaming drives user lock-in, cross sales and engagement
Ecosystems of service & apps From converged networks to converged devices
Copyright VisionMobile 2007-10 Page 28
Huge gap between telecoms & software worlds Telecoms world Software world
Success factor Installed base Number of apps
Speed of innovation 1 OS version every 2 years 5 OS versions/year
Time to market 1-2 years 1-2 weeks
Type of services comms-centric catering to entire needs portfolio
Risk-taking predictability / de-risking entrepreneurship / uncertainty
Access to innovation 100s of close partners 100,000s of developers
Business model B2B licensing B2C sales/ads/in-app sales
Channel to market voice, text and web smartphones
Discovery On deck / on device App store
First step “we need to sign an NDA” “we need to download the SDK”
Process Waterfall: RFI, RFQ, deliver, QA
Agile: add feature, build, test, repeat
Attitude “developers will come to us” “we need to go to developers”
Copyright VisionMobile 2007-10 Page 29
Changing channels & speed of innovation
')))$ ')")$
Operators 18-24 months to launch
5-10 major content publishers
Operators 12-18 months to launch
100s of content publishers no innovation in voice, text and SIM
App stores 2 months to launch
100,000s of developers 5000,000+ apps in 2 years
Page 5
Copyright VisionMobile 2011 49
Networks effects stronger than economies of scale
scale
user
val
ue
Platform business value grows
exponentially due to increased number of interconnections
Conventional business value grows linearly due to
cost saving and decreasing price
Ecosystems of experiences From converged devices to roaming experiences
2015 2010 2005
Evolving meaning of convergence From converged networks to converged devices, what’s next?
? one bill, triple play
one device, 1,000s of apps
vision
focal point
compete based on
price of service
number of apps
network device
Social circle
Developer ecosystem
User data roaming
Service roaming
User interaction design
Industrial design
Brand
experience roaming across screens
convergence = x
The new meaning of convergence is experience roaming across multiple screens
Social circle
Apps ecosystem
User data roaming
Service roaming
User interaction design
Industrial design
Brand
Apple is the poster child of experience roaming Apple leads by example, by delivering a consistent experience across divers screens
Experience roaming
Ping
App Store
MobileMe
iTunes, AirPlay
iOS
Apple
Apple
iPod iPhone
iPad
Mac
Apple TV
Across screens
?
It’s no longer about smartphones Key ecosystems are expanding across 4 screens
Mac computers iPhone iPad Apple TV
Chrome browser Android Android tablets Google TV
Windows, Office Windows 8 Windows Phone Xbox
PC smartphone tablet smart TV
2015
Convergence in 2015 will be around ecosystems and experience roaming across many types of devices
one ecosystem, 10s of screens
ecosystems
experience roaming
2010 2005
one bill, triple play
one device, 1,000s of apps
network device
vision
focal point
compete based on
price of service
number of apps
Competition will move to experience roaming competition will shift from number of apps to experience roaming • Mobile platform landscape will further consolidate around Apple
and Google both ecosystems are propelled by strong network effects and protected by user lock-in
• Microsoft will continue its push to become the 3rd ecosystem faces long uphill battle as it needs to win users back from Apple and Google ecosystems
• Facebook will rally behind mobile web to become 4th horse driven by the need to weaken native platforms and disintermediate native app stores
• Platform competition will shift from number of apps to experience roaming as all platforms will strive to reach users across all touch-points and devices
www.DeveloperEconomics.com
KEY INSIGHTS
A new way of measuring openness, from Android to WebKit
A VisionMobile research report part-funded by webinos, an EU funded project
Published July 2011
Open Governance Index
Copyright VisionMobile 2007-10 Page 9
So what on earth is open source?
Four different perspectives to open source:
- Legal: software under an OSI-approved license 60+ licenses are approved by the OSI. Including licenses submitted by Nokia, Microsoft, W3C, IBM
- Business: a collaborative software development methodology For developing common building blocks
- Product: a mid-point between build and buy (‘share’) You can build, buy, or share costs, risks and benefits
- Marketing tool : a means of building a benevolent reputation used by Google in Android to buy community credence and good will
- - Belief : a cultural movement for preserving developer rights. Against the proprietary control or private ownership of software which is created by the community
Copyright VisionMobile 2007-10 Page 10
Open source is not a strategy!
It’s about:
✔ about sharing costs & risks costs there are costs in ad-ons, integration, support,..
✔ a choice of 4 company roles: use, modify, distribute or contribute.
✔ reducing barriers to contribution attracting developers is about scratching an itch
✔ the midpoint in build vs buy you can now build, ‘share’ or buy
✔ There are tools to manage risk code scanning, license choice, technical/legal DD, ..
✔ a product-level decision
Open source is not:
✗ about reducing costs..
✗ all or nothing..
✗ a community builder..
✗ unlike 3rd party software..#
✗ a virus to IP#
✗ a company strategy..
Copyright VisionMobile 2007-10 Page 13
Can operators manage the 6 facets of OSS?
- Software license governs use of the source code
- Governance model governs use of the product (access, development, derivatives, community structure)
- Community development autonomous vs sponsored culture, balancing corporate vs community interests
- Upstream vs downstream development balancing code branching and merging
- Econometrics of effort and influence metrics of influence and effort
- Using open source within the organisation Inbound vs outbound policies and processes
The six facets of OSS
Copyright VisionMobile 2007-10 Page 14
APL
BSD
Copyleft Copyright Copycenter
LGPL GPL Prop. EPL
Copyleft vs copyright The fundamentals behind open source licenses
Prohibit from reproducing, adapting, distributing
Copy & use freely Permission to reproduce, adapt & distribute but must share alike
Foundation
Governance goes beyond licenses. While licenses determine the rights to use, copy and modify,
governance determines the right to gain visibility, to influence and to create derivatives of a
project, whether in the form of spin-offs, applications or devices.
Governance vs licenses
Licenses'vs.'Governance'models'
License' Governance'
Rights' Use,'copy,'modify'Visibility,'influence'and'crea:on'of'
deriva:ves'
Use'70%'of'projects'under'7'
licenses'No'agreed'defini:on'of'governance'
Examples' GPL,'LGPL' No'formal'examples'
Legal' Binding' NonHbinding'
Source:'VisionMobile'
Copyright VisionMobile 2007-10 Page 5
While:
- Licenses are standardised, converged and well understood 5 licenses used most often in mobile projects (GPL, LGPL, EPL, APL, BSD)
- Governance models are non-standard, diverging and poorly understood
And while:
- Licenses are about source control source code access, modification, ability to copy/reuse, contribution and distribution
- Governance is about project control Codelines and content, contributors and committers, roadmap strategy and visibility, trademarks..
Open is the new closed
Copyright VisionMobile 2007-10 Page 6
Licenses vs Governance models in mobile, licenses converge but governance models diverge
governance model
open community managed community autocratic community
weak copyleft (LGPL, MPL, EPL,..)
strong copyleft (GPL)
permissive (APL, BSD, MIT, ...)
Linux kernel
license type
Qt
dual license (commercial + copyleft)
Android
Foundation Foundation WebKit
sim
ilar
licen
se
diff
eren
t gov
erna
nce
Copyright VisionMobile 2007-10 Page 18
Benefits of open source
- Allows sharing of development costs and risks e.g. Linux Kernel worth over $600 million
- Allows open-doors software standardisation allows standardisation through code which is more effective than API-level standardisation
- Taps into a library of mature software, particularly on PC/Internet 260,000 projects on SourceForge of which 30,000 are in production phase
- Reduces barriers to contribution within but only if designed within the governance model (like: Eclipse. unlike: Symbian)
- Encourages innovation on top if employed properly (like: Android. unlike: Symbian)
Copyright VisionMobile 2007-10 Page 19
Benefits of open source (continued)
- Creates new value areas in software support and productisation Integration, testing and productisation are much more crucial in OSS than in proprietary software
- Faster supplier negotiations and reduced supplier lock-in However licenses are generally non-negotiable, unless you can find the copyright holder
- Better software quality through peer incentives Peer recognition incentive drives quality. Less so ‘given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow’
It’s about open source methodologies, not open source itself.
Copyright VisionMobile 2007-10 Page 21
6 + 2 business models for open source
TRADITIONAL
1. IP royalties for commercial-licensed branch or add-ons, e.g. Trolltech
2. Productisation usually NREs for customisation and integration e.g. Tieto
3. Maintenance & support e.g. Funambol
4. Certification fees e.g. Sun TCKs
5. Bundling offer software for free but bundle services, e.g. Google
6. Try before you buy e.g. Volantis
NEW!
7. Liability insurance e.g. WindRiver
8. Access to influencers e.g. Collabora
Android gameplan Open is the new closed
Copyright VisionMobile 2011
“A customer can have any colour he likes
for his car so long as it’s black”
Henry Ford
Copyright VisionMobile 2011
“we are using compatibility as a club
to make them do things we want.”
Dan Morrill, Google
in an email dated 6 Aug 2010
released via the Skyhook filings
Copyright VisionMobile 2007-10 Page 2
Economics of complements
Microeconomics: Every product has substitutes and complements.
Complement Core Product
Product demand increases as complement prices decrease
A product consumed with the main product
Copyright VisionMobile 2007-10 Page 3
How Google uses complements
Google Complements Google Core Product
On-line advertising mobile networks handsets browsers
Commoditisation of mobile increases demand
for Google products
net neutrality
open source OS
Chrome, WebKit
Closed ad network
Copyright VisionMobile 2011109
The Android control points
How Google runs the show:
- Private codelines (6+ months ahead) available to 2 OEM partners per release
- Exceptionally fast pace of innovation 5 new versions (2 major, 3 minor) released in 1 year
- Gated developer community Android Market is the default channel for apps
- Closed-source apps Android Market, GMail, Google Maps, GTalk, etc under commercial agreement
- Android trademark use of Android trademark subject to commercial terms
- Controlled review process all reviewers work for Google, plus rampant NIH culture
Copyright VisionMobile 2011 24
Source: Google-internal presentation disclosed as a result of Oracle's patent and copyright infringement lawsuit against
Open governance index A new way to measure openness
Open Governance Index • OGI Report published in July 2011 • To date it has been downloaded over 7,000+ times • Cited in over 20+online journals including:-
IT Writing, ZDNet, Wired News, BGR, MIT Technology Review, Slash Gear, Phandroid, ARS Technica, Linux Today, Mobile Trends, Computer Hyper, RPMfind, Fanatics Club Linux Life, Today-Google, Open Source This and PC Pro
• Sparked numerous tweets from industry participants – Chris DiBona, Head of Open Source Programmes at Google; Open Source
Advocate Matt Asay and Mike Milinkovich, Director of Eclipse – Discussions centred around the importance of openness and the growing
importance of governance in open source projects as open source becomes more ‘main-stream’
• OGI Report positioned the ‘open’ governance of projects such as webinos as a strength versus the ‘closed’ governance of other projects
Open Governance Index • The OGI Report set out to quantify the ‘openness’
of open source projects in terms of – transparency, decision-making – reuse of code and community structure
• OSS Projects analysed included:- – Android, Eclipse, Linux, MeeGo, Mozilla, Qt, Symbian and WebKit.
• The Open Governance Index compared 13 metrics across 4 areas of Governance comprising – Access, Development, Derivatives and Community to determine the
‘openness’ of these projects.
• Report identified common ‘Best Practices’ with regard to open source project management – Highlighted the importance of meritocracy in the long term success of
any open source project
Copyright VisionMobile 2007-10 Page 7
Access: how is code accessed and open to whom?
• Is source code available to all without discrimination?
• Is source code available under a permissive OSI-approved license?
• Are project mailing lists, forums, bug-tracking databases and developer tools
available to all?
• Is the project roadmap available publicly?
Development: how is code developed within the project?
• Are decision-making mechanisms transparent and accessible?
• Is the code contribution and acceptance Process clear and accessible?
• Can you identify from whom contributions are received?
• Are the requirements to become a committer clear and equitable?
Open governance criteria (1/2)
Copyright VisionMobile 2007-10 Page 8
Development (cont’d)
• Can you identify who committers to the project are?
• Are the requirements to become a committer clear and equitable?
• Can you identify who committers to the project are?
• Does the contribution license require copyright assignment (vs. a license)
Derivatives: how is code used outside of the Project controlled?
• Are Trademarks used to control compliance/use of the project?
• Are go-to-market channels for Application Derivatives constrained?
Community
• Do different community members have different rights?
Open governance criteria (2/2)
Copyright VisionMobile 2007-10 Page 9
1. All successful open source projects are supported by commercial organisations success does not exist in a vacuum from industry
2. Successful projects are usually managed on the basis of meritocracy - except Google who have retained control on all aspects of the Android Project
3. Trademarks increasingly used to control platform compliance and protect branding
4. Open source projects use OSI approved open source licenses use of proprietary licenses rare these days
5. All Projects have very good Developer Support Mechanisms minimum requirement for a successful project
6. BUT Projects also differ greatly regarding culture transparency of decision-making; code contributions processes; project roadmap information and project metrics (details of contributors/committers etc)
Open governance: research findings
webinos vision
Meritocracy, Open community, Open innovation, Open standardization
Our research identified certain attributes that successful open source
projects have. These attributes are:
- timely access to source code,
- strong developer tools,
- process transparency,
- accessibility to contributing code, and
- accessibility to becoming a committer.
Equal and fair treatment of developers – “meritocracy” – has become the
norm, and is expected by developers with regard to their involvement in
open source projects.
Best practices of open governance
Impact of OSS on the development of the Internet
All of the following initiatives have an implicit bias – some stronger than others – but all are biased to one or more actors in the market
Android: Google Meego: Nokia-Intel Limo: Samsung Tizen: Samsung-Intel Apache: IBM Webkit: Apple
The problem is adoption: • successful collaboration in open source is measured not by how much is
developed, but by how much it is used. • Any initiative that is biased will cripple its growth of adoption • A company cannot put its strategic supply chain into the hands of its
competitor
webinos vision
• Cultivate an open source community that precludes overt bias. long term success, and ubiquitous adoption, is dependent upon: • day to day operations of the community to be as inclusive as possible
• positively encourage new participants at all times
• allow all to operate as peers.
• move the innovation out from behind closed doors, and into a
communal public space.
• speed up the standardisation process, Minimise the commercial risk through collaborative innovation in a clean sandboxed domain.
Copyright VisionMobile 2011
Knowledge. Passion. Innovation.
[email protected] @gevou George Voulgaris | VisionMobile Ltd | Business Partner | +44 2033 844 164
Updated: 12 November 2010
get in touch