Comments on: The Adobe/Omniture/2o7.net Controversy and the Danger of Closed Source http://www.tinyscreenfuls.com/2008/01/the-adobeomniture2o7net-controversy-and-the-danger-of-closed-source/ I'm a storyteller. I find cool new things, use them to make my life better, and teach others to do the same. Fri, 16 May 2008 02:32:35 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: kim http://www.tinyscreenfuls.com/2008/01/the-adobeomniture2o7net-controversy-and-the-danger-of-closed-source/#comment-52077 kim Mon, 14 Jan 2008 20:20:55 +0000 http://www.tinyscreenfuls.com/2008/01/the-adobeomniture2o7net-controversy-and-the-danger-of-closed-source/#comment-52077 I agree that there's some deceptive stuff going on here, but I think it's a bit misleading to say that it's a closed source/open source issue. The adobe rep doesn't say they don't know what's in the source. he says they don't know why someone chose and registered that URL. I think that answer is bunk, I also think they could easily register another domain (adobeappsphonehomehere.com for example) and update the software. However, this isn't an issue of closed vs open source. This is an issue about the way a company treats its customers. I do think there's an issue regarding transparency and accountability, and that open source could be ONE way to help address that, but its not the only solution. BTW, one of my Ignite submissions that is coming today is very much related to this topic. I agree that there’s some deceptive stuff going on here, but I think it’s a bit misleading to say that it’s a closed source/open source issue.

The adobe rep doesn’t say they don’t know what’s in the source. he says they don’t know why someone chose and registered that URL. I think that answer is bunk, I also think they could easily register another domain (adobeappsphonehomehere.com for example) and update the software. However, this isn’t an issue of closed vs open source. This is an issue about the way a company treats its customers.

I do think there’s an issue regarding transparency and accountability, and that open source could be ONE way to help address that, but its not the only solution.

BTW, one of my Ignite submissions that is coming today is very much related to this topic.

]]> By: Luke Gedeon - Solutions Researcher » The dangers of growing too fast. http://www.tinyscreenfuls.com/2008/01/the-adobeomniture2o7net-controversy-and-the-danger-of-closed-source/#comment-51889 Luke Gedeon - Solutions Researcher » The dangers of growing too fast. Fri, 11 Jan 2008 02:53:54 +0000 http://www.tinyscreenfuls.com/2008/01/the-adobeomniture2o7net-controversy-and-the-danger-of-closed-source/#comment-51889 [...] has a bit of code in their software that they did not know was there. I originally saw this on Josh Bancroft’s site. He covered the open versus closed source-code angle on this story, but what really jumped out [...] [...] has a bit of code in their software that they did not know was there. I originally saw this on Josh Bancroft’s site. He covered the open versus closed source-code angle on this story, but what really jumped out [...]

]]> By: Mike http://www.tinyscreenfuls.com/2008/01/the-adobeomniture2o7net-controversy-and-the-danger-of-closed-source/#comment-51835 Mike Thu, 10 Jan 2008 08:25:14 +0000 http://www.tinyscreenfuls.com/2008/01/the-adobeomniture2o7net-controversy-and-the-danger-of-closed-source/#comment-51835 I agree that it's tough for Adobe to integrate products from another company and be absolutely sure that everything is perfect. But that's their job and their consumer promise, they get hit in the bottom line if they screw it up and that's the way it should be. Besides, they've had how long to integrate Macromedia? Since early 2005? But I disagree on your thought that open-source software is more secure than closed-source. What about open-source makes it inherently more secure? There's still people working on it and, no offense to the open source community, it's quite possible that one of the open-source developers has nefarious intentions and creates a back-door or viral payload that some other developer either cannot se or just plain misses in review. My point is that we are always putting ourselves at the mercy of a large group of developers, cosed or open source, and really have no practical method for determining the safety of the product other than the brand. In this case, Adobe got burned and so did we, but that could happen with any software. At least the brand signifies quality until that brand ruins its image; and when the brand image is ruined, then we know to stay away. Full Disclosure: I currently own CS3 suite, run open-source software, keep a box running Ubuntu (just for fun and as backup system). I agree that it’s tough for Adobe to integrate products from another company and be absolutely sure that everything is perfect. But that’s their job and their consumer promise, they get hit in the bottom line if they screw it up and that’s the way it should be. Besides, they’ve had how long to integrate Macromedia? Since early 2005?

But I disagree on your thought that open-source software is more secure than closed-source. What about open-source makes it inherently more secure? There’s still people working on it and, no offense to the open source community, it’s quite possible that one of the open-source developers has nefarious intentions and creates a back-door or viral payload that some other developer either cannot se or just plain misses in review.

My point is that we are always putting ourselves at the mercy of a large group of developers, cosed or open source, and really have no practical method for determining the safety of the product other than the brand. In this case, Adobe got burned and so did we, but that could happen with any software. At least the brand signifies quality until that brand ruins its image; and when the brand image is ruined, then we know to stay away.

Full Disclosure: I currently own CS3 suite, run open-source software, keep a box running Ubuntu (just for fun and as backup system).

]]> By: Luke Gedeon - Solutions Researcher » The dangers of growing to fast. http://www.tinyscreenfuls.com/2008/01/the-adobeomniture2o7net-controversy-and-the-danger-of-closed-source/#comment-51824 Luke Gedeon - Solutions Researcher » The dangers of growing to fast. Thu, 10 Jan 2008 04:38:24 +0000 http://www.tinyscreenfuls.com/2008/01/the-adobeomniture2o7net-controversy-and-the-danger-of-closed-source/#comment-51824 [...] has a bit of code in their software that they did not know was there. I originally saw this on Josh Bancroft’s site. He covered the open versus closed source-code angle on this story, but what really jumped out [...] [...] has a bit of code in their software that they did not know was there. I originally saw this on Josh Bancroft’s site. He covered the open versus closed source-code angle on this story, but what really jumped out [...]

]]> By: StumbleUpon - Your page is now on StumbleUpon! http://www.tinyscreenfuls.com/2008/01/the-adobeomniture2o7net-controversy-and-the-danger-of-closed-source/#comment-51806 StumbleUpon - Your page is now on StumbleUpon! Wed, 09 Jan 2008 22:58:53 +0000 http://www.tinyscreenfuls.com/2008/01/the-adobeomniture2o7net-controversy-and-the-danger-of-closed-source/#comment-51806 <!--%kramer-ref-pre%-->[...] Your page is on StumbleUpon [...]<!--%kramer-ref-post%--> Kramer auto Pingback[...] Your page is on StumbleUpon [...]

]]>