Going Solo?

by Chris Bonnici

Following the recent acquisition of Micronetics, the market now has only one vendor. There are many who have voiced concern at the idea of having the entire M world controlled exclusively by a single player. A number of alternative suggestions/solutions have been forwarded in newsgroups, to MWM’s mailboxes plus some which have not been considered up to now.

A Freeware version of M

A freeware version of M placed into public domain (for example GNU-style), making it easy for individuals to download a copy practically for free. Thanks to the availability and expansion of the Internet, updates and fixes can be made available at practically zero cost (if you already have a server, a few megabytes for this implementation of M don't tickle the budget line).

From my own searches, aside from Micronetics no other company provided student versions of the language. The recent decision by Micronetics to make Workstation available freely was also encouraging. Whether this trend will continue is pure debate, but if InterSystems withdraws such products, someone interested in experimenting with the language will find nothing to experiment with. This is a great pity as many will simply pass M by. Such a project would now be a blessing in this respect.

On the commercial side, I publicly voiced concern as to whether the commercial arena will be seriously interested in such a product. I still retain this opinion although replies to my concern pointed me to Linux. I spoke to a friend who has experimented with Linux. His comments were that it is not as friendly as NT and has more problems working with certain add-on cards and peripherals. On the issue of technical support, I was told that Linux is more user driven and although "there are people out their who know it inside out, you have to bet that your request is noticed attention".

I would also appreciate if anyone can provide me with an independent source carrying statistics on the the number of units shipped of Linux, Windows NT, etc. From this data I would then compute and publish in MWM the rate of growth of these products and (re)comment after this data has been made available.

How will such a product be built. One suggestion is to use the abandoned project at UC Davis. My own experience in project management tell me that sometimes it is better to start off with a clean state than adopt something currently not functional and that has not been maintained (I don't know whether the project is documented) for a reasonably long time.

The clean slate version sponsored by one or more MTAs would, in my opinion, ensure that no ownership problems prop up in the future. Besides, it would encourage the project team to analyze and insert new developments and capabilities in the most efficient and effective manner. Another benefit of this option is that the project, if managed properly, can be built up by geographically remote people.

Another hurdle is to get people interested in dedicating time and effort into it (and sustaining this for a reasonable amount of time). This is a very big problem. What happens when the initial steam runs out. Project managers must motivate people as much as possible and those in charge of documenting the project must perform an outstanding job especially since one has to assume that the project can/will change hands a lot. Assume the project is sponsored by MTAs, a certificate plus a mention in all official documentation may be considered by many a sufficiently high reward to encourage people to participate in it. For example, active involvement for a minimum of 1 year, will automatically entitle you to both. I could use the certificate when applying for a job; the mention in the documentation is for self pride--"I was involved in the project; check out the documentation".

Another new company

Assume a new company (lets call it M2) enters the M market with its own version of M. M2 has stable products, that can serve the needs of many companies. Would you purchase from it? Probably many think that InterSystems will probably buy M2 out, once it becomes sufficiently interesting. This thought will make it very difficult for the company to sell its products (even though, as stated in the commentary, InterSystems has always serviced acquired clients).

The company depicted above is a privately owned firm. A few individuals whose personal fortunes may at some point in time come miles before their company and the pride of having a company.

Assume M2 is employee owned. For example, suppose Micronetics staff made redundant together with those who leave and a few more form a cooperative. Cooperatives are firms in which participants share profits and although a management structure exists major decisions are taken by everyone. Some cooperatives, have clauses that restrict people who leave from retaining shares in the company. These would have to be sold back to the company which in turn either offers them to new entrants or sells them to existing members. A buyout of such a firm is normally much more difficult and this can make such companies less prone to buyouts.

Initially M2 would offer training and support on existing M products while developing its own version of M. The M world has a second supplier.

Getting someone else interested in it

Why sow a plant as a seed when you can stick in the soil a fully developed organism? Assume one could get Microsoft, Inprise (previously Borland), Symantec or IBM interested. These companies have the muscle to make M popular and have experience putting in visual ends into products and marketing them. With the exception of maybe IBM none of the other companies have a rock solid and efficient high-end database product that is tried and tested. I for one would see Microsoft edging its way into such as market to fight off its arc rival Oracle (who equally detests Microsoft's guts). Microsoft at one time licensed Micro Focus COBOL (as Microsoft COBOL) but moved out of the market after a short while. M, I feel is much more dynamic than COBOL and can be manipulated with greater ease. It is much simpler to have powerful and flexible front end builders that create M output than those that produce COBOL.

This scenario is possible although there are no guarantees that one fine day this division is sold off. These companies add value to a product and if the right buyer comes forward (with the right amount of green paper) they part voluntarily. How does one get such companies to even look at this product is a mammoth task, getting them involved in it is even greater.

Pick your choice

The alternatives presented here have their pros and cons but each one has varying degrees of making M a more-than-one language.

Comments on this article

E&OE