The chief executive and co-founder of one of Silicon Valley's pin ups for open-source and cloud services has suddenly resigned. SugarCRM's John Roberts has left "to pursue other opportunities," the company said Thursday. He has been succeeded by an interim chief executive Larry Augustin. Augustin is a serial board-member and …
Everyone is expendable
it only costs to replace them.
Not quite sure if the recession is good for open source really, I suppose it depends what you mean by that.
Are people going to be exploiting open source to keep costs down and discover that open source software is actually very good as a base, yeah sure.
But less people will release open source software and instead try to capitalise on it. Which is fine as well, most of the software is mature now, and the real gems are the development tools, those will always get a good polishing.
It is none contributing users that will bear the brunt a bit, and the support models of Ubuntu, Mandriva and Suse may have to come in and create the candy software for the unwashed masses.
Whoo they moved fast; he is off the team page already.
There are more CRM vendors than just Salesforce.com
Why do you always bang on about Salesforce.com? There are other CRM vendors out there...
SugarCRM > Salesforce.com
@BoldMan - probably because salesforce.com is the closest competitor, and Sugar makes a big thing about being as good as salesforce, but a lot cheaper. (Actually they seemed to have toned this down lately -not sure why as the comparison made sense)
Having been involved in a mid-sized salesforce rollout, and later experimented with Sugar, I can safely say that with a PHP developer and a good sysadmin you can deliver 95% of the functionality of salesforce, plus some things that salesforce doesn't deliver, for less than 25% of the cost.
I'll personally be very sad to see SugarCRM go under -my experience of the SFDC team (not the developers behind the system, the ones who go to your company and implement it) is that they over-promise, under-deliver, and jump ship as soon as possible leaving you with a partial rollout and a massive bill. With SugarCRM, on the other hand, you get exactly what you pay for. More work on your side, but realistic expectations and a product you can customise to suit you.
Hopefully, SugarCRM will be bought by someone who can market it properly...
Code and communitymatter,
..not a single person (or as someone noted - a handful of people).
Once again a "tech journalist" who probably has never written a line of code in his life is weighing in on a non-event as if it mattered to anyone really involved.
The great thing about LAMP stack apps is that they are all open - and Sugar is no different. If the company SugarCRM goes away - who cares? The project still has hundreds of thousands of supporters. In fact, in the UK there isn't even a real Sugar corporate office, and it's still going strong - the corporate side of Sugar is irrelevant to the product's success, and I'd argue the CEO even less so.
And I also agree that the comparison to Salesforce.com is silly. Two very different models and two very different cultures - I'd like to think that VCs sinking millions into a company knew what they were getting into. Expecting an open source company to see 500 million pounds in turnover a year in half the time as a proprietary SaaS company spending 100 million pounds a year in marketing - yeah, that's a feasible expectation. Let's see where SugarCRM is in a full 10 year cycle and then make comparisons (remember Salesforce took eight years to see its first profit).
I like how this writer throws out like 5 names over a few years of people sacked. Please. Has anyone here ever worked in sales? In tech startups? Turnover is part of the business. How many presidents and major VPs have left oracle, Salesforce, Siebel etc. without it seeming alarming (hello, Shai Agassi left SAP and less was made of that and he was actually the only brain in that operation for the past decade.)
In short, Gavin, pull your head out of your arse.
Don't get too excited about Sugar. I've been developing commercial SugarCRM modules for several years and can tell you that the quality of Sugar's code is shockingly bad. Their appalling documentation doesn't make matters any better. Yes, you pay less initially for Sugar but their horrible framework means anything but the most mundane customizations take more time, effort (and thus money) than any decent framework.
My hope is that if someone buys Sugar they overhaul the code base, ideally porting it to something sensible like Symfony.
- Infosec geniuses hack a Canon PRINTER and install DOOM
- Feature Be your own Big Brother: Monitoring your manor, the easy way
- Boffins say they've got Lithium batteries the wrong way around
- In a spin: Samsung accuses LG exec of washing machine SABOTAGE
- Phones 4u slips into administration after EE cuts ties with Brit mobe retailer