[Linux-aus] New website rocks!
pia at linux.org.au
Sun Sep 19 17:12:03 UTC 2004
On Sat, 2004-09-18 at 23:38, Del wrote:
This was put together about 6 months ago as a first attempt to gives
outsiders some idea of the open source/others landscape. I think that
this is missing somewhat, and it certainly helps people to understand
how the different groups interrelate, but I agree that the diagram needs
> I disagree with your classification of the ACS as an industry group
> (alongside OSIA), while you classify the AUUG as a community group.
Maybe I should have a scale rather than one versus the other? Perhaps
LA AUUG ACS OSS SIG OSIA
AUUG seems to be more professionally focused than LA to some degree, but
every AUUG conference or meeting I've attended had been pretty community
centric. They're just like LA, only less Linuxy and older! ;) It's all
the same geekiness and beer swilling. The ACS OS SIG is half geeky half
professionals, OSIA are certainly the most industry centric. Does that
> Both groups are formed from individual members of the computing
> and IT community. As you will be aware, AUUG focuses entirely
> on open systems users whereas the ACS attracts members from all
> ends of the IT spectrum. However they are both still about individual
> members, regardless of what industry they work in, and are therefore
> not industry associations. They are both more correctly classified
> as professional associations, being organisations formed from
> individual professional members. Although the AUUG accepts corporate
> members (and the ACS does not), neither organisation can be called
> an industry association because neither organisation has members that
> are primarily corporates within one industry.
Yeah, maybe I should just swap the work industry for professional? That
doesn't seem quite right though... perhaps corporate? It is a matter of
the two different perspectives. For instance, I would almost be inclined
to have the ACS OS SIG, and ACS generally on either side of the coin, as
they are two different perspectives within the same org.
> OSIA on the other hand, like AIIA and ATUG, is an industry association,
> as it represents the open source industry, rather than individual
> open source users. OSIA members are corporate entities -- the OSIA
> has no means to admit an individual person as a member (except that
> act as a company or registered business).
> If I was to re-draw this diagram, I would put Linux Australia at
> one end with the LUGs to represent the community; SAGE, AUUG, and
> ACS in the middle as professional associations; and OSIA and the
> industry roundtable at the other end under "industry".
Hmm...great suggestion! So:
and then place the orgs along the line? The idea is to give outsiders
some idea of what the landscape is, from this I'm hoping they can find
the org that may be most useful to their needs/interests.
> Quoting from web sites:
> "SLUG members are made up of professionals, semi-professionals,
> hobbyists, and just those who like to play and gain knowledge of
> Linux ..."
> "The Australian Computer Society (ACS) is the recognised association
> for Information & Communication Technology (ICT) professionals ..."
> "[AUUG] members are professionals who care about
> * Unix operating systems from proprietary vendors
> * Linux, BSD and other Open Source operating systems ..."
> "OSIA is the national industry body for Open Source within Australia."
Awesome! Great feedback. I was thinking rather than a linear
represenation, maybe a circular one is more appropriate, after all we
are all playing together in this space to some degree. How about
http://www.linux.org.au/~pia/OS-landscape.png as a first draft? Jeff and
I were throwing around the idea of having a few options at the top for
say developers, government, businesses and then having the groups
highlighted with some indication of degree of relevance to that area,
with url links to each group. Sound useful?
Pia Smith <pia at linux.org.au>
More information about the linux-aus