As I have anticipated, I have published in ODBMS.ORG a white paper on Next-Generation Object Database Standardization written by the OMG`s Object Database Technology Working Group.
It is a very interesting readings!
I asked 10 +1 Questions on Innovation to Marten Mickos, CEO, MySQL AB.
See his reply below.
10 +1 Questions On Innovation to: Marten Mickos, CEO, MySQL AB.
Mårten Mickos joined MySQL AB as CEO in 2001. Under his leadership, the company has grown from a start-up to the second-largest open source company and the fastest-growing database vendor in the world. Prior to MySQL, Mickos held multi-national CEO and senior executive positions in his native Finland. He holds a M.Sc. in technical physics from Helsinki University of Technology.
1. What is “Innovation” for you?
Some new thing or way of doing things that brings economical
value to a customer.
2. Who are your favorite innovators?
I admire IKEA for innovating the production and distribution process, Apple for innovating usability (mostly from existing
components), and the free and open source software movement for having innovated a great new way to produce and distribute software.
3. What do you consider are the most promising innovations of the last 3 years?
I don’t make such assessments! I’d rather spend time helping innovators than assessing them. I follow Wayne Gretzky’s principle that “You miss 100% of the shots you don’t take.”
So I think we should try to get more innovations done, not try to find the top 3. The markets will pass their judgment on the innovations anyhow.
4. What does it help to become a successful innovator?
Curiosity. A meticulous ability to make observations. A desire to contribute. An ability to let go of old thoughts.
Perseverance.
5. Is there a price to pay to be an innovator? Which one?
Every passion has its price. Most innovators never hit a home run. But all innovators have to give up something else (mostly time).
6. What are the rewards to be an innovator?
I am not an innovator myself, but I believe that the best reward an
innovator can get is to see his or her innovation in productive use.
7. What are in your opinion the top 3 criteria for successful innovation?
Frugality, combination, meticulousness.
8. What would you recommend to young people who wish to pursue innovation?
To start innovating in their everyday life, and to not give up even if it takes years to develop the ability to see new solutions and make them happen.
9. In your opinion how can we create a culture that supports and sustains innovation?
By making heroes of the innovators.
10. What do you think stops/slows down innovation?
I believe that the propensity to innovate is fairly stable across the world and over time. But there also needs to be a full set of supporting functions (investors, sales channels, labour market, etc.) and those we can influence.
For instance, I am not sure Silicon Valley is any more innovative on a base level than any other place, but Silicon Valley has all the functions that you need to make an innovation come true.
10+1 .Do you think becoming an innovator can be taught? If yes, how?
I believe there is an amount of passion needed that you cannot teach.
But I think you can wake up a dormant passion for innovation by exposing young people to successful innovators.
This is the principle of “hanging out and drinking beer with Nobel laureates”. It is extremely stimulating.
Also, I think you can teach the techniques of innovation, as well as the skills you will need to bring the innovation to commercial success.
Hope this is useful!
///mgm
I will be shortly publish in ODBMS.ORG a white paper on Next-Generation Object Database Standardization written by the OMG`s Object Database Technology Working Group.
Here is the abstract of the White Paper:
“Following the dissolution of the Object Data Management Group (ODMG) in 2001, standardization efforts for object databases languished. What has emerged since is a fractured marketplace where each vendor has developed a unique set of programming interfaces and features and no truly portable way of interacting with an object database exists. In 2005, the OMG’s Object Database Technology Working Group was formed as the successor to the ODMG, and our first effort has been to create the object equivalent of the relational calculus. We believe that the foundation for this “object calculus” can be found in the research done by Prof. Kazimierz Subieta and his students at the Polish-Japanese Institute of Information Technology. We have prepared this white paper to serve as an introduction to Prof. Subieta’s “stack-based architecture” (SBA) and to define the OMG version of it. The definitions and semantics of SBA will, we believe, allow the construction of a complete and correct object model that supports a powerful object query language as well as a complete and correct set of equivalent native programming language bindings. ”
What is the goal of this initiative?
Quoting the white paper: “What we would like to have in the end is a new standard for object databases that is based on a sound theoretical framework with precise and complete definitions. Prof. Subieta’s work is a great starting place because it shows what must be available in an object store in order to support an advanced query language. What we imagine is a new standard which could be fashioned after the ODMG 3.0 specification, something like this:
OMG “Next Generation” Object Database Standard (“ODMG 4.0”)
Chapter 1 – Introductory material
Chapter 2 – New object model based on the abstract store model and an abstract stack-based object query language (AOQL), includes definitions and detailed semantics of all optional features to be standardized
Chapter 3 – XML/XSD specification for data import/export as replacement for “ODL”, provided for all conformance levels
Chapter 4 – Full syntax of abstract query language, provided for all conformance levels
Chapter 5, 6, … – Programming language APIs for specific language bindings
Our new specification would not have to be done in this way, but such an organization would be familiar to those who have used ODMG 3.0 in the past. Of prime importance would be clear definitions and explicit semantics (especially in chapter 2), even including the use of state diagrams or Petri nets as needed to convey the semantics of how certain features are supposed to work in conformant products.
Looking forward, the plan is (assuming there is sufficient vendor interest) for the ODBTWG to prepare (and then issue from its parent task force) one or more RFPs that together will establish the full and complete definitions of the abstract query language (AOQL) and the semantics of the abstract store models, as well as, the semantics and behaviors of optional features (compliance points). This will be the Platform Independent Model (PIM) for a conformant object database. When the PIM is defined, it will serve as the basis for a series of RFPs to develop specifications for concrete implementations of the “Next Generation Object Database” in Java, C++, etc., i.e., Platform Specific Models (PSMs).”
It will be interesting to see if this initiative takes off and if sufficient vendors support it.
I will be writing about it in my next posts.
Roberto V. Zicari
ODBMS where did they go?
September 26, 2007–
If we look back at the history of ODBMS. one sees how when the first generation of ODBMS were introduced, expectations did not really meet reality, notwitstanding all the efforts and enthusiams put on it.
So one asks himself a question. What happened to the ODBMS? Where did they go?
And perhaps a more interesting and actual question is what are the realistic chances for the “new wave” of ODBMS products?
As always, part of the answers can be given by trying to understand the past.
The first wave of ODBMS failed partially because the market conditions were not ready.
In particular, object technology (in particular object oriented languages) were not as diffuse as they are now.
So the issue of “impedence mismatch” between programming languages and databases, was mainly an interesting
academic issue, but not really felt by the market.
I visualize it like a sales person who is trying hard to sell a mini sport convertable car to a family with a number of kids who is not really interested in that…
Things have changed in the meanwhile. Object Oriented Programming Languages (OOP) are widely used.
It is estimated that today we have between 3 and 4 million Java developers. Also, very important in my opinion, for the acceptance of the use of OOP, was the decision of Microsoft to develop Csharp. The Microsoft development world has changed with the introduction of the .NET Framework.
Object Modeling is no more fragmented in several different methodologies like in the early days (the first object-oriented modelling languages began to appear between mid-1970 and the late 1980s, and went up to more than 50 during the period 1989-1994. Most notably Booch, OOSE/Jacobson, OMT).
It has now found a de facto standard, UML. UML is not merely an object modeling software methodology. Many companies are incorporating UML as a standard into their development process and products, which cover disciplines such as business modeling, requirements management, analysis and design, programming, and testing.
UML being a standard has helped the acceptance of OO technology, especially in certain domains.
And relational databases are still there… They changed, yes, but they are still there.
Moreover, new marked opportunities arise. For example, with 1.2 billion cell phones in the world, mobile software development has become a lucrative industry.
So what are the *real* chances for the new generation of ODBMS?
I have decided to work on this issue and try to come up with a reasonable answer. I am planning to collect some relevant information and hopefully this will be assembled in a white paper I am planning to write for December.
In the meanwhile, if you have any input, feedback you wish to give me, there are very welcome!
Roberto V. Zicari
O/R mismatch: What is the Problem?
August 28, 2007
There has been quite a discussion recently on the so called “O/R mismatch”.
This is a quite interesting discussion. The bottom line is that after so many years, still object persistence does not seem to have a fully adequate solution.
This is ackward, bringing programming languages and databases seems still a rather diffcult task…!
There are a number of interesting resources I have recently published on this subject on ODBMS.ORG.
In cooperation with FranklinsNet, ODBMS.ORG has published the transcript of the panel discussion “ORM Smackdown” between Ted Neward and Oren “Ayende” Eini on different viewpoints on Object-Relational Mapping (ORM) systems.
It is an interesting reading. Pls check: ORM Smackdown
I have also published Ted Neward’s follow on essay discussing solutions to the problems
of Object/Relational-Mapping titled “Avoiding the Quagmire”.
This new essay is a follow on to Neward’s “The Vietnam of Computer Science” , which compared
the inherent problems of object/relational mapping to the quagmire in the Vietnam war.
The initial “Vietnam” essay was first published in 2006 and widely discussed in the industry.
“Avoiding the Quagmire” discusses the impact of choosing to integrate object concepts into the database as opposed to using relational concepts or object/relational mappers.
Neward states that while using an object oriented database management system (ODBMS) will not completely eliminate all of the problems described in the intial “Vietnam” essay, it does address some of the more egregious problems. ODBMS thus frequently provide the developer a better chance of avoiding the quagmire and allowing them to focus more clearly on the problem at hand.
Pls check: Avoiding the Quagmire
I published a copy of Ted Neward’s “The Vietnam of Computer Science”.
Neward argues that the O/R mismatch is a quagmire where current approaches including object-relational mappers (ORMs) are subject to decreasing marginal returns. He lists the abandonment of objects (as a programming paradigm) or of relational data structures (as a database paradigm) as the only wholehearted solutions, while living with the pain or full integration of ORMs into languages or databases are other approaches.
I personally do not like the analogy with Vietnam… but the article has a number of interesting points. The article as you may immagine has received a mix feedback from the readers….
Here is the reference: The Vietnam of Computer Science
10 Questions On Innovation
August 2007–
In my work as Editor of ODBMS.ORG
I started a Section on Innovation.
I believe this is important. In the IT industry innovation plays a key role.
But how does innovation occur? I thought the best way is to ask who did some mayor innovation..
So I asked:
Ivar Jacobson. creator of OO methodologies
Alan Kay, pioneer of OOP, PC, and GUI
Vinton G. Cerf, father of the Internet
Philippe Kahn, founder of Fullpower, LightSurf, Starfish, and Borland
You can read in this blog their answers to my 10 Questions On Innovation.
Learning from great innovators is one source of inspiration, but not a guarantee of course…
Enjoy.
— Roberto V. Zicari
August 2007– I wote a research paper together with my colleague Jesper Holck while I was at the Copenhagen Business School:
A Framework Analysis of Business Models for Open Source Software Products with Dual Licensing
Working Paper, CBS/INF, No. 1, January 2007
Jesper Holck, Roberto V. Zicari
Copenhagen Business School
Department of Informatics
Howitzvej 60
DK-2000 Frederiksberg, Denmark.
Abstract
Aim of this research is to identify the key elements that play a significant role in the success of business models for companies which produce software products based on open source using dual licensing. For that we have defined a new framework analysis that can be used to evaluate existing and new business models.
More on our reseaerch at the DBIS Web site,
August 2007– Last semester I did teach at the Copenhagen Business School a master course on
“E-services and business models for the Web”.
For the course I have created a resources page where you can download interesting material: E-BMW Resources
I am interested to receive up to date resources that I can add to the course resource page.
August 16 2007–
This summer I was in the Bay Area. I took the occasion and visit IBM Almaden Research and Google.
I gave a presentation both at IBM and Google on my research project, Gugubarra.
Here are some details:
Title of the talk:
The Gugubarra Project: Building and Evaluating User Profiles for
Visitors of Web Sites.
Speaker: Roberto V. Zicari
Computer Science Department,
Goethe University of Frankfurt, Germany.
Work done in cooperation with Natascha Hoebel, Sascha Kaufmann,
Karsten Tolle, Naveed Mustaq.
Index Terms: User Profiles, Web Communities, User modeling, Clustering methods
—————————————————-
Abstract
In this talk I will present an overview of the work we are
currently doing in the Gugubarra project. The project aims at
building tools for better managing communities of Web visitors.
The Gugubarra project (Gugubarra is the Aboriginal name for the
Kookaburra bird) began in 2004 within the database group (DBIS)
at the Computer Science Institute of the Johann Wolfgang Goethe
University, with the aim to build tools for better managing
communities of registered Web visitors.
In this talk I will present the results of the project so far
and outline some open research issues.
The starting point of our project is the assumption that a
community of users is registered on a Web site and that for each
user a profile is built. A User profile is based on the actions
and navigations the user performs on the Web site.
In Gugubarra, we offer various settings that can be used to
create and manage user profiles. By using these settings the Web
site owner can focus on those aspects he wants to analyze.
The approach we have in Gugubarra is as follows:
i) For each registered Web visitor we create a profile.
These user profiles reflect the “inferred” interests of the
users related to a set of pre-defined topics defined by the owner of
the Web site. The profiles go beyond collecting the obvious
information the user is willing to give at the time of
registration. In Gugubarra, a user profile contains two parts:
the obvious profile, given directly by the user and a non
obvious profile (NOP), inferred by the user’s behavior during his visits
on the site.
ii) A user profile is (re)-calculated dynamically any time an
explicit feedback is given by the user and/or a set of events
occurred which are related to the user’s behavior and to certain
“locations” of the Web site.
iii) We cluster Web visitors by clustering similar profiles of
interest [5]. Cluster of Web visitors can then be used to
analyze patterns of interests in the Web community and to forecast
further behavior. Clusters might also provide useful information
to support the decision what kind of new E-services to introduce
for the Web community and when to introduce them.
A first research prototype system, called Gugubarra 1.0 has been
implemented in 2004 [1], which allows to build and manipulate
non-obvious user profiles. It was showcased at the CeBIT Trade
Fairs in 2004 and 2005. Gugubarra 1.0 works as a test
application on real data provided by the Web community viewzone.org.
A new prototype system, Gugubarra 2.0, is currently being
designed [3], [2] which includes a more sophisticated approach
to the definition of non-obvious user profiles and allows
clustering users by interests [4]. In this talk I will focus mainly on
the new features introduced in Gugubarra 2.0 and refer to [6] for
the features implemented in Gugubarra 1.0
—————————————————–
Resources
[1] Building and Evaluating Non-Obvious User Profiles for
Visitors of Web Sites. N. Mushtaq, K. Tolle, P. Werner and R.
V. Zicari.
IEEE Conference on E-Commerce Technology (CEC 04) July 6-9,
2004,San Diego, California, USA (.pdf 265KB)
[2] The Gugubarra Project: Building and Evaluating User Profiles
for Visitors of Web Sites. N. Hoebel, S. Kaufmann, K. Tolle, R.
V. Zicari.
First IEEE Workshop on Hot Topics in Web Systems and
Technologies (HotWeb 2006), November 13-14, 2006, Boston,
Massachusetts, USA (.pdf 415)
[3] The Design of Gugubarra 2.0: A Tool for Building and
Managing Profiles of Web Users. N. Hoebel, S. Kaufmann, K. Tolle, R. V.Zicari.
IEEE/WIC/ACM, International Conference on Web Intelligence,
2006, Hong Kong (.pdf 100) Long Version: (.pdf 196)
[4] On Clustering Visitors of a Web Site by Behavior and
Interests.
N. Hoebel, R. V. Zicari. in Studies in Computational
Intelligence Series, Springer, AWIC ’07 (.pdf 155)
The above papers can be downloaded at:
Gugubarra Papers
If you are interested you can also view the video of my presentation at Google.
August 2007–
Dr. Ivar Jacobson is one of the great thought-leaders in the software world where he has made several seminal
contributions. He is one of the fathers of components and component architecture, use cases, modern business engineering, the Unified Modeling Language and the Rational Unified Process. He is the principal author of five influential and best-selling books. He has written more than 50 papers and he is a regular keynote speaker at large conferences around the world.
1. Who are your favorite innovators?
[ivar] I am very impressed by some innovators that have made the world a better world, but I really don’t have any favorites. My favorites are found in other spaces such as sport, music and art.
2. What do you consider are the most promising innovations of the last 3 years?
[ivar] I have not given this question any thoughts.
3. What helped you to become a successful innovator?
[ivar] I have never seen me as an innovator. I have tried to solve problems we have with software, but I guess that could be seen as innovations. I introduced components in 1967 as a means to build software architectures that could change gracefully over many years and that could be reused for many different applications. I introduced use cases to get more understandable requirements at the same time as they worked as test cases.
4. Did you pay a price to be an innovator? Which one?
[ivar] Being a manager for a large project and at the same time fighting for a better way of building software is professional suicide. After having introduced components at Ericsson it took ten years before the company knew it had created history in the telecom space. In the mean time I was demoted and recommended to leave the company. The recommendation was given by my boss who later became the president of Ericsson.
5. What are the rewards to be an innovator?
[ivar] I never came up with an idea to be rewarded. Components made it possible to develop a product that could be adapted to every customer with small costs and made it possible for me to do what I had been asked to do. Use cases streamlined the life cycle since use cases were test cases. However, later I have been rewarded because people adopted these ideas. I have been able to work with fantastic people around the world and make a living out of it.
6. What are in your opinion the top 3 criteria for successful innovation?
[ivar] This is a new question to me, but I will give it a try. An innovation should 1) be practical, 2) stand on a good theoretical foundation, and 3) be simple to understand. I usually quote Kurt Lewin: There is nothing as practical as a good theory. Even a rather complex idea must be presentable in a simple way.
7. What would you recommend to young people who wish to pursue innovation?
[ivar] First of all, don’t make it your goal to become an innovator. If you have good ideas, you will have to fight for them. Many people have good ideas, but most give up due to the resistance that comes from the establishment. Success requires perseverance. On the other hand don’t become greedy. Don’t focus on making money, but be generous with your ideas. You have more ideas that you can harvest from later on. And have fun.
8. In your opinion how can we create a culture that supports and sustains innovation?
[ivar] There are many obvious answers to this question so I will try something different: First, in Sweden there was a time when we had no world class tennis players. Then we got Bjorn Borg. After Bjorn Borg we got many world class tennis players. We have similar effects in other areas. If someone has great ideas, let her or him work with promising people and they will all soon be more interested in coming up with new ideas. In my companies I have had great people around me that now are very alert for new ideas. For example Gunnar Overgaard, Per Kroll, Agneta Jacobson, Maria Ericsson, Dave West, Patrik Jonsson, Pan Wei Ng, Ian Spence, Kurt Bittner, Magnus Christerson, Stefan Bylund. Nothing is as effective in growing an innovative culture as working with innovative people.
In big companies actively supporting alternative careers has been very effective in growing an innovative culture.
9. What do you think stops/slows down innovation?
[ivar] I can’t think of anything more than the obvious answers.
10.Do you think becoming an innovator can be taught?
[ivar] Absolutely
