Asosiasi Open Source Indonesia (AOSI)

Majulah IGOS, Indonesia, Go Open Source!

Archive for November, 2008

CEO Yahoo! Jerry Yang segera mengundurkan diri

Posted by sroestam pada November 18, 2008

CEO Yahoo! Jerry Yang

CEO Yahoo! Jerry Yang

Pendiri dan CEO Yahoo! Jerry Yang akhirnya menyatakan bahwa Ia akan segera mengundurkan diri selaku CEO Yahoo! yang disandangnya sejak bulan Juni 2007. Tugas utamanya saat itu adalah untuk mengalahkan Google, pesaing utama dalam bisnis Search Engine dan Online Advertising. Ia telah melakukan perampingan usaha dengan memberhentikan 15.000 karyawan, namun tetap saja laba dan nilai saham Yahoo! menurun terus, terutama sejak awal athun 2008 ketika akhirnya Microsoft menghentikan tawaran akuisisi Yahoo! dengan pembelian saham Yahoo! sebesar US31.00 diatas nilai saham saat itu sebesar US$19.00 (60% nilai premium). Jerry menginginkan Microsoft membeli saham diatas US$31.00/saham, yang ditolak oleh Steve Balmer, CEO Microsoft.

Jerry melakukan upaya untuk kerjasama Advertising dengan Google, namun gagal karena oleh KPPU AS langkah ini dianggap akan menyebabkan persaingan bisnis yang tidak sehat.

Mundurnya Jerry Yang selaku CEO Yahoo! akan membuka kembali upaya Moicrosoft untuk menguasai Yahoo!. Namun menurut para analis, Yahoo! hanya punya dua pilihan: Diakuisisi oleh Microsoft atau merger dengan America Online (AOL).

Yahoo! yang semula adalah Market Leader dalam bisnis Search Engine dan Online Advertising adalah karena kekalahan Strategi Bisnis dan Innovasi Teknologi yang dimenangkan oleh Google. Microsoft adalah ranking ketiga dalam pasar bisnis ini.

Silahkan ditanggapi.

—————— sumber berita The New York Times —————-

SAN FRANCISCO — Jerry Yang, who, as chief executive of Yahoo, resisted a takeover bid from Microsoft only to later ask that merger talks resume, said he was stepping down.

In a memorandum sent to the company’s staff Monday evening, Mr. Yang, 40, said he would hold the post until the board names his successor, a process he said he would participate in. The Yahoo co-founder said he would then return to his previous job as “chief Yahoo,” a corporate strategy role, and would remain on the board.

In a memorandum typed in his style using no capital letters, he wrote, “i strongly believe that having transformed our platform and better aligned costs and revenues, we have a unique window for the right ceo to take ownership over the next wave of mission-critical decisions facing the company.”

The announcement comes a year and a half after Mr. Yang assumed control of Yahoo from Terry Semel, a Hollywood studio boss that he handpicked for the job. Mr. Yang’s tenure has been marked by a precipitously declining stock price and the high profile collapse of a $44 billion acquisition offer from Microsoft last spring.

A Yahoo spokesman described the decision as “mutual” and “in progress for a while.”

“Jerry and the board have had an ongoing dialogue about succession timing, and we all agree that now is the right time to make the transition to a new C.E.O. who can take the company to the next level,” Roy J. Bostock, Yahoo’s chairman, wrote in a statement. “We are deeply grateful to Jerry for his many contributions as C.E.O. over the past 18 months, and we are pleased that he plans to stay actively involved at Yahoo as a key executive and member of the board.”

Yahoo has hired executive search firm Heidrick & Struggles to help look for candidates.

Shares of Yahoo closed at $10.63 in regular trading Monday, but shot up more than 4 percent in after-hours trading, with shareholders expressing some measure of relief that Yahoo’s long downward spiral might finally be arrested.

“It’s definitely positive from a shareholder perspective,” said Ross Sandler, an analyst at RBC Capital Markets. “Jerry has done less than a stellar job after taking the reins from Terry Semel last year, not just completely botching the Microsoft deal but with poor execution and multiple company restructurings that have done little to restore confidence of any of Yahoo’s shareholders, employees or customers.”

Mr. Sandler also raised the possibility that Mr. Yang’s departure could rekindle interest by Microsoft in Yahoo. Steven A. Ballmer, Microsoft’s chief executive, has complained that Mr. Yang had no real interest in the deal. A Microsoft spokesman declined to comment Monday.

Yahoo said it would look for possible replacements inside and outside the company. Potential candidates include Susan L. Decker, Yahoo’s president; Daniel L. Rosensweig, the former chief operating officer of Yahoo who is now a principal at the investment firm Quadrangle Group; and Jonathan F. Miller, the former head of AOL.

After Mr. Yang was named to take over the Internet portal, search and online advertising company in June 2007, he tried to develop a plan to help Yahoo compete against Google, the dominant company in search and online advertising. He made several major cuts in the staff. On Oct. 21, Yahoo announced it would lay off at least 10 percent of its 15,000 employees, as it said that third-quarter net income fell 64 percent and lowered its revenue projections for the year.

Mr. Yang’s most trying period began in February when Microsoft made an unsolicited bid for the company. He initially refused to accept Microsoft’s bid of $31 a share, a 62 percent premium to its then share price of $19.18. In the following months of negotiations, he showed some willingness to sell the company, but at a much higher price than Microsoft was willing to pay. Microsoft rescinded its offer in May.

Mr. Yang then made an advertising deal with its arch rival Google. The deal was supposed to bring Yahoo $250 million to $450 million in additional cash flow in the first year. Google would deliver ads next to some of Yahoo’s search results and on some of its Web sites in the United States and Canada. Under pressure from regulators over antitrust concerns, Google backed out of the deal this month.

Many analysts and investors have suggested that without the deal, Yahoo would be forced to consider one of two options: a deal with Microsoft, or a merger with AOL.

Yahoo and AOL have discussed a merger for months.

“all of you know that i have always, and will always bleed purple,” Mr. Yang wrote in the memorandum, a reference to Yahoo’s corporate color.

Posted in CEO Yahoo! Jerry Yang mengundurkan diri | Dengan kaitkata: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Total Cost of Ownership OSS vs Proprietary: A BIG Difference!

Posted by sroestam pada November 15, 2008

Software-software Open Source saat ini telah berkembang begitu pesat sehingga dapat dikatakan bahwa pada umumnya tidak ada perbedaan antara Software OSS dengan Software Proprietary bila kita lihat dari segi aplikasinya. Namun bila kita lihat dari segi Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) dari kedua jenis Software itu, maka akan terlihat sangat jauh perbedaannya. Singkat kata, TCO Software Open Source jauh lebih murah dari TCO Software Propritary.

Dari segi aplikasi, Operating System Open Source, sepertu Ubuntu telah berkembang begitu pesat diseluruh dunia, termasuk di Indonesia yang didukung oleh organisasi Ubuntu Indonesia yang memberikan support secara gratis. Oleh karena itu di Indonesia telah muncul banyak Distro yang berbasiskan Ubuntu, seperti Ki Hajar, Lontara versi 3.0, dan lain-lain. Google-pun memanfaatkan operating system Debian Ubuntu sebagai basis untuk software Aplikasi-nya yangmutakhir, yaitu gOS atau Google Operating System lengkap dengan aplikasi Google Desk Top dan OpenOffice serta berbagai aplikasi bisnis lainnya.

Software Aplikasi Perkantoran yang paling mutakhir, yaitu OpenOffice.org versi 2.4 juga sangat canggih, dapat membaca dan menulis file format .docx, yaitu file dokumen Microsoft terbaru (MS Office 2007), yang mana MS Office 2003 malah tidak dapat mengenalnya! Software OpenOffice ini juga mampu membaca format file dokumen yang populer, yaitu format Adobe Acrobat Reader PDF.

  1. Cara menghitung TCO: Biaya investasi awal software + biaya training dan biaya upgrade serta pemeliharaan software selama waktu penggunaannya. Untuk biaya investasi, jelas OSS lebih murah dari pada Proprietary. Untuk biaya training, OSS dan Proprietary tidak banyak berbeda. Sedangkan untuk pemeliharaan dan upgrade, OSS bisa diperoleh secara gratis atau murah melalui organisasi pendukung atau melalui komunitas OSS di tiap negara. Sedangkan untuk Proprietary, tidak ada pilihan lain, yaitu melalui Vendor atau Reseller-nya dengan biaya yang tidak kecil, apalagi bila ada bug atau defect dari software Proprietary, maka yang bisa memperbaikinya hanyalah Vendor aslinya.
  2. Biaya Migrasi Proprietary ke OSS: umumnya kecil, sebab software OSS dapat dilihat source code-nya, tidak ada yang disembunyikan. Ini berbeda dengan software Proprietary yang menyembunyikan source code. Lagi pula, kebanyakan software aplikasi OSS memiliki features dan pengoperasian yang sangat mirip dengan software aplikasi Proprietary.
  3. Apa hambatan Migrasi Proprietary ke OSS? Hambatan utama migrasi ke OSS adalah karena masyarakat belum menyadari besarnya penghematan yang dapat diperoleh dari TCO OSS yang jauh dibawah TCO Proprietary, ditambah dengan kebiasaan mereka memakai software Proprietary, baik yang diperoleh secara legal maupun illegal selama bertahun-tahun yang lalu.

Kini tiba saatnya untuk secara besar-besaran melakukan migrasi dari software Proprietary ke software OSS, sebab sudah makin canggihnya berbagai software aplikasi OSS dan semakin banyaknya perusahaan atau organisasi yang dapat memberikan support bagi software2 OSS.

Model Bisnis Software OSS akan lebih difokuskan kepada support services, yaitu instalasi, customization, training, education, certification, dan maintenannce. Keuntungan lainnya adalah dalam menghemat Devisa Nasional tiap negara, sebab biaya akuisisi Capex software OSS sangat minimal. Yang lebih besar adalah support services seperti tersebut diatas, yang semuanya dapat dilakukan oleh tenaga-tenaga ahli lokal. Akan makin banyak tumbuhknya industri support software OSS domestik, sehingga dapat mensejahterakan masyarakat pribumi.

Silahkan ditanggapi.

Open Source Transforms Software TCO

Source: IT Business Edge | Priority: Maximizing IT Investments | Topic: Financial Metrics
Date Published: 11/12/2008

Carl Weinschenk spoke with David A. Wheeler, widely known open source analyst.

Weinschenk: How do you determine total cost of ownership in open source?
Wheeler: Determining TCO is simple, in principle. Just add up the estimated costs over the time of use. Some costs, such as training, typically are similar for open source software – OSS — and proprietary software. The initial licensing fees are often different. OSS often has little or no initial licensing fees, while the initial licensing fees are often substantial for proprietary software. This means that you can often “try out” OSS as long as you like, and then pay for support later once the software becomes more important to your business.

Weinschenk: So does a company need to invest in parallel development if it is “trying out” the software? What if it doesn’t measure up?
Wheeler: It depends on what the company is planning to do with it. If you must have a particular function, then clearly trying out multiple different OSS options or not is part of the process of making a rational decision. Different organizations do it differently based on the level of risk.

Weinschenk: What happens after the purchase?
Wheeler: Support is probably the most remarkable difference between OSS and proprietary software. If you’re basing your business on the software, you need to fund some kind of support plan, whether it’s OSS or proprietary. For proprietary software, you really have only one support option – the original vendor – because they are the only ones who can actually fix important defects.

Weinschenk: In a proprietary situation, can support come from an unconnected third party?
Wheeler: Other parties can act as support for proprietary software, but in some sense they are only middlemen for the original software vendors. That’s because they usually cannot fix defects in the software or make substantial changes to it. “With proprietary software, the vendors make it difficult to transition by hiding how the data is stored. It is fundamentally not really possible to hide how it is stored in an OSS product. It is not really possible to hide the open source programs. As a result, there may be some costs, but they tend to be small because the key problem — lack of information about stored data – isn’t an issue.”

Weinschenk: Does this affect TCO?
Wheeler: Sure, because TCO includes the product supply function. There can be errors that are accepted and the company moves on. Some are more serious and must be corrected or the company will suffer major losses. You may say that in the proprietary world the company is dependent on the maker of the software to correct things. If it is a very large fee to make it so, you are going to have to pay that large fee. That is one of the major differences between OSS and proprietary software.

Weinschenk: The sheer number of OSS options available must be good for TCO.
Wheeler: That competition often drives down prices. For popular OSSes, there are typically many options, such as companies that specialize in supporting that particular software. Red Hat, Novell and Sun are examples. There also are more general support organizations. A remarkable number of organizations do OSS support internally. But for most organizations, I suggest paying for the external expertise just as you would for proprietary software.

Weinschenk: Why do you suggest going outside the organization?
Wheeler: Fundamentally, a lot of organizations do not have the internal expertise, nor do they need to. You use outsiders for the same reason you pay specialists to do other things.

Weinschenk: What other costs are there?
Wheeler: Transition costs are something else to consider. In the proprietary world, there often is significant cost to change to anything else, be it proprietary or OSS. This is no accident. Proprietary software developers have a large financial incentive to make this so. But transition costs are not necessarily a reason to stay with the same software. Vendors often have high annual support costs. Consider how long you’ll be using the software, including its later versions. Once you consider the total costs over time, the transition costs may very well be worth it.

Weinschenk: Are there transition costs with OSS?
Wheeler: There often don’t tend to be large ones. The reason is pretty simple: With proprietary software, the vendors make it difficult to transition by hiding how the data is stored. It is fundamentally not really possible to hide how it is stored in an OSS product. It is not really possible to hide the open source programs. As a result, there may be some costs, but they tend to be small because the key problem — lack of information about stored data – isn’t an issue.

Weinschenk: You suggest that improvements made by a company in OSS software should be resubmitted to the main project. How does this relate to TCO?
Wheeler: If you don’t submit the improvement back to the project, the version you have will increasingly be out of sync with the main body of work. You will lose the benefit of that main body of work as the inconsistencies between what you have and that main body grow. TCO will grow because you will be maintaining your original version, and that will be more troublesome and expensive. Most of the cost is in maintenance. You want to share costs with as large a group of people as possible.

Weinschenk: What is the biggest challenge in making people take advantage of OSS and the TCO benefits it seems to offer?
Wheeler: Probably the biggest problem today is that many people don’t realize that OSS is commercial software, and thus never even consider it as an option. A lot of people say, “I only want commercial software” and mistakenly ignore OSS. They don’t realize it is commercial software. The whole reason to use commercial software is because it creates an economic model where multiple users can share resources to develop better products.

Posted in TCO Open Source Software vs Proprietary: beda besar! | Dengan kaitkata: , , , , , , , , | 5 Comments »