webinos and Open Ecosystems Open Governance

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”


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


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


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..


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


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'


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


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


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)


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.


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


“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


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


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


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

Google

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


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)


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)


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.


Knowledge. Passion. Innovation.

[email protected] @gevou George Voulgaris | VisionMobile Ltd | Business Partner | +44 2033 844 164

Updated: 12 November 2010

get in touch