University Politehnica of Bucharest [605618]

1

University Politehnica of Bucharest
Faculty of Automatic Control and Computers

Master Programme

Service Engineering Management

Knowledge Engineering and Services Ecosystem

Subject

Semester 1, 2016 -2017

Project Title

Essay

Student: [anonimizat]: Nicu Ioana Ancuta
E-mail: [anonimizat]

2
Cusumano The Changing Software Business: Moving from Products to Services

In the software industry, Our Great Shift Continuous enough. These changes have important
impacts un for both user s and producers of software services and products.
Most revenues come from software games, with all of Cà online gambling services revenues
games are in a rapid growth. Since 2000 there have been many businesses and customers of a
Against paid a lot of mon ey for software standardization Or commodity -type products.
The growth of new business and tariff models such as software as a service and software "free".
Large companies now offer a free service, the user does not pay directly to the software
company. Companies receiving money through agencies providing software services.
Lifecycle idea suggests that companies software start generating most of their income from
license fees product, but the passage of time in a mixture of products and services and possi bly
the most services.

Bridges and barriers to hardware -dependent software ecosystem participation – A case
study, Information and Software Technology

Software -based ecosystems have emerged from the need to provide greater value in the market.
Recently, software ecosystems are often used to support the development of hardware dependent
solutions.
Software sales on the software has been transformed using shares more actors promote relations
management, rather than the quality and quantity of development.
The models are developing concurezepe when companies start to new levels and is based on
components and infrastructure from third -party providers or provider. The relations between
these actors modeling software in a software ecosystem.
Aria Software Ecosys tem (SECO) is a new field of research and theoretical foundation resulting
in a multitude of definitions of the concept SECO. SECO has been identified as a subject in the
research of software engineering.
Software ecosystems can be created by expanding sof tware product lines beyond the limits
moored platforms and organization, thus creating benefits.

Variability mec hanisms in software ecosystems, Information and Software Technology

Software ecosystems are some of the most popular economic systems, stra tegic and technical
application platform such as Android or iOS that allows users to customize a system extreme
selecting the desired functionality from a wide variety of assets. Customization is accomplished
by using mechanisms of variability.
Ecosystems are implementing software systems variability of diversity it offers, using implement
radically different techniques, also known as varuabilitate mechanisms.
Linux kernel and Android are two great examples of large software ecosystem classes with great
success. Variability centrally manage Linux, carefully controlling the admission of new features

3
in its official release. Android manages decentralized variability, variability in embracing and
encouraging a free market applications. Both systems are based on different mechanisms to
achieve their goals.
Software ecosystem is an emerging field of research that has been addressed from different
perspectives. It is defined as the degree of opening technical support for consumers to freely use
an ecosystem assets in emergencies that their courts or their product installations. Transparency
varies between two extremes: dark (without support) to open (full support). In both cases, users
can use active ecosystem; However, the closed platforms, they must be integrated into the
platform first. in other words, opening 'is the degree to which a supplier of platform platform
allows users to interact with the platform, visualization, extend or modify its components'.
Transparency is a key feature distinguishing subjects.
A m echanism of variability is a technique for implementing design decisions delay of
functionality and quality of a software system. To adapt flexibly to the software user
requirements in subsequent steps, such as build -, startup – or run -time points of variat ion are
entered into a software platform, using an architecture that supports variability. variability are
mechanisms where there is a variability. Our ecosystems stretch quite different domains,
organizational structures and different scales, performed wh ile. Discuss this variability
mechanisms to put in context.
ECOS is a free operating system in real time to deeply embedded applications that require an
area high portability, low memory usage and small binary images. With a market share of 5 -6%,
it powers inter alia, multimedia, networking and automotive devices. ECos consumers are highly
specialized embedded systems developers. eCos maintain advanced tools such as configurator
with a reasoning engine.
ECos and Linux to declare dependencies between functio ns in their patterns of variability. Due
to the high level of abstraction, variability models allow flexible specification complicated
structures of dependence.

Analysis and design of software ec osystem architectures – Towards the 4S telemedicine
ecosyste m

Telemedicine, remote healthcare provision is undoubtedly an effective way to increase access to,
reduce costs and improve quality of care. However, the development of telemedicine is
experiencing standards, which are difficult to use, application -specific data models, and
application stove pipes that inhibit the adoption of telemedicine solutions.
Research area Ecosystem Study software has emerged as the complex interaction between staff
and extensible software architecture (e) software , on the one hand and organizations, users,
customers, developers and companies on the other. Is inspired by natural ecosystems, the species
are characterized by their symbiotic relationships and survival relies heavily on survival of the
ecosystem.
The m ain research of this paper can be summarized by the question:

4
'' How CAN BE software ecosystems modeled in a way that allows systematic reasoning about
software ecosystems while details of the software ecosystem CAN BE abstracted away? '
The definition emp hasizes that the architecture of a software ecosystem consists of several
structures, each consisting of actor and software elements. Software forms the core of a software
ecosystem, therefore the software structure software ecosystem is important. Moreove r, a
primary goal of the software ecosystem players is to create value (in a non -profit or non -profit)
and therefore the business structure of a software ecosystem becomes relevant.
While many other structures can be identified for software ecosystem, we c ontend that the three
above are very relevant and critical reasoning on a software ecosystem. The organizational
structure of a software ecosystem contains actor and software that are related to the governance
and organization of interaction of elements of the ecosystem.
Important aspects of the organizational structure and actor elements are sets of software
included, they define the limits of the ecosystem and how the structure and support coordination
govern interactions between actors and software elem ents.

Measuring the health of open sou rce software ecosystems: Beyond the scope of project
health

Open source ecosystem is important for different participants: software developers, end users,
investors and participants want to know whether their ecosyst em is healthy and works bine.In
currently have no operational work available that can be used to sanatarea determine open source
ecosystem. Health is usually seen in a scope, no scope to ecosystem .
Ruby or Python? SugarCRM or closed -source competitor? Drup al or Joomla? RedHat or
Ubuntu? These are some of the questions addressed by the developers, professionals,
entrepreneurs, architects and stakeholders about the organizations producing software.
A choice between different ecosystems is a complex and such a decision will be to determine
many future developments within an organization.
The only way to answer such a question is to make reading and finding what the risks are to
choose to enter an ecosystem. The activity consists of commits, recently communicate d, fixes the
number of downloads, response times in forums and trackers, activity on e -mail lists, and
contributions from non -developers.
The work presented is based on two relevant contributions in the field of health masuare
ecosystem. Crowston activity et al, who provided the first open source software project health, is
used to determine the health factors at the project level. Software ecosystems are sets of actors
that works as a unit and interacting with a common market for software and services, tog ether
with the relationships between them.
It was created as a division within the network and is required at project level to distinguish
between values and ecosystem level (aggregate) at project level values. Secondly, they were
created and two lists of documents, each project operationalization level of ecosystem health and
operationalized one of sănătate.Toate values from levels reported were collected. The essential

5
elements of ecosystem health were covered, the three pilonidal productivity, robustness , and
creating niche were added as a result of his work Hartigh den et al.
Matrix of creating niche project level indicates whether the project enables freedom and
variation sufficient for end users and contribute to creating new niche project solutions. I t is
impossible to design directly the health of a project on ecosystem health, ecosystem health as
consider several interrelated projects, contributors, and users.

Joining a smartphone ecosystem: Applicati on developers’ motivations and decision criteria

Ecosystems around current smartphone operating systems, in particular app markets offer
significant value for customers and therefore possibilities for differentiation provider.
In recent years, the process of innovation in many fields switched from the t raditional process of
innovation where innovations are designed and made exclusively in companies for a general
process where integration and use of parts from outside plays an important role. The importance
of mobile applications in the ecosystem and smar tphone market places particular emphasis on
developers of such applications and their motivations, perceptions and choices. The wide range
of functions and goals sought and offered by mobile applications leads to greater complexity
diversity programs. Soft ware companies that develop complex applications for clients, there are
also many private or business users who become evangelists. This study provides the first
research about perceptions and motivations of individual innovators third party smartphone
operating system market when choosing a platform to join and develop. Jansen et al also
highlight the importance developer perceptions on the issue of opening. Ecosystem dynamics
and governance which provides only a limited number of validation studies or eva luation.
Android and iOS that shows a difference in variety of end -user devices affects the development
of mobile software, applications and changes that often are customized to work flawlessly on
different hardware configurations.
While iOS devices are built exclusively by Apple and global contract manufacturers of these
devices end user Android are built by many manufacturers. Since each manufacturer tries to
create his own unique selling proposition there are a number of different hardware specifications
and user interfaces. While Apple updates iOS are developed and distributed directly to end users
devices, the Android smartphone more requires additional steps and therefore takes longer.
Major Android updates are developed by the Open Handset Alliance and are directly available
only to current official Android device development. For all other Android device manufacturers
must adapt their specific hardware upgrade.

Software engineering beyond th e project – Sustaining software Ecosystems

The main part of software engineering methods, tools and technologies have developed around
projects that form the central organizing software development. Organziarea project depends on
clear limits regarding the scope, participants, developme nt effort and lead -time.

6
The software is increasingly developed, adopted and implemented in the form of c ustomizable
and Product configurable software engineering as a discipline must take on the challenge of
supporting software ecosystems.
The notion of ecosystems has been used in recent years to describe the software developed,
maintained and evolved through collaboration developer of software and 3rd party developers.
Bosch proposes the concept of ecosystem trans -organizational collaboration software wh ere 3rd
party developers add functionality to a product based on an open software platform.
We and other research that focuses on the interaction between the various actors in the
ecosystem:
– Hanssen describes the journey of a software product from its in ception enthusiastic a mature
ecosystem involving customers in the development and open architecture to allow third party
development.
– Janssen et al research focuses on the interaction between different players in the software
ecosystem.
One problem is o ver ecosistemel cooperation, especially with the end user in order to
communicate user innovations and developments in the use -context to inform the development.
The second point is the technical design. If the software must be adapted to different context s of
use, part of the design is postponed as organizational setup customization or implementation and
use ev en in context. A function of design is the separation and coordination of the various
constituencies design development. Architecture and design ten ds to be tacit knowledge of a
community of practice rather than an explicit evolving document for the coordination and
development.

Characteristics of software ecosyste ms for Federated Embedded

A case study traditionally Integrated Systems (ES) are close ly related to physical products, and
closed both for communication with the surrounding world and additions or modifications by
third parties. The new technique however are developing solutions that allow adding software
plug-in and external communications for both software installation and data exchange. These
mechanisms will allow the combination to build integrated federated systems (FES). Expected
benefits include the possibility of third party actors in developing add -on functionality; a shorter
time t o market for new features; and the ability to update the products in the field. However, this
will require not only new technical solutions, but also a transformation of ecosystems ES
software.
In many industries in developing technical products, such as a utomotive,
aerospace, and process automation, Embedded Systems (ES) and software plays an increasingly
important role. Traditionally, ES has been an integral part of the physical product and finished
product in charge of controlling and monitoring during i ts operation. Some of the key features of
many ES are that they must be cost -effective, reliable, robust, safe, and secure, and therefore
they are usually tailored for a particular product.

7
ES software is typically monolithic in that product is handled as a single piece, without being
able to replace only part of it, or to add new parts on top of those present.
Software is installed during production and upgrades normally on ES requires physical
connection. Often, ES is developed by an external provider bas ed on a specification from the
manufacturer responsible for the final product integration.
With the arrival of affordable communication technologies, especially wireless, it becomes
feasible to provide external communication capabilities ES. This ultimatel y allows software
updates to be carried out remotely, even if such flexibility upgrades would be limited due to the
nature monolithic ES software.

8
References :

1. Anne Immonen, Marko Palviainen, Eila Ovaska, Requirements of an Open Data Based
Business Ecosystem, IEEE Access,(2014)
2. Michael A. Cusumano, The Changing Software Business: Moving from Products to
Services, IEEE Computer, 2008.
3. Jakob Axelsson, Efi Papatheocharous, Jesper Andersson, Characteristics of software
ecosystems for Federated Embedded Systems: A case study, In formation and Software
Technology 56 (2014) 1457 –1475
4. Yvonne Dittrich, Software engineering beyond the project – Sustaining software
Ecosystems, Information and Software Technology 56 (2014) 1436 –1456
5. Stefan Koch, Markus Kerschbaum, Joining a smartph one ecosystem: Application
developers’ motivations and decision criteria, Information and Software Technology 56
(2014) 1423 –1435
6. Slinger Jansen, Measuring the health of open source software ecosystems: Beyond the
scope of project health, Information an d Software T echnology 56 (2014) 1508 –1519
7. Henrik Christensen, Klaus Marius Hansen, Morten Kyng, Konstantinos Manikas,
Analysis and design of software ecosystem architectures – Towards the 4S telemedicine
ecosystem, Information and Software Technology 56 (2014) 1476 –1492
8. Thorsten Berger, Rolf -Helge Pfeiffer, Reinhard Tartler, Steffen Dienst, Krzysztof
Czarnecki,Andrzej Wsowski, Steven She, Variability mechanisms in software
ecosystems, Information and Software Te chnology 56 (2014) 1520 –1535
9. Krzyszto f Wnuk, Per Runeson, Matilda Lantz, Oskar Weijden, Bridges and barriers to
hardware -dependent software ecosystem participation – A case study, Information and
Software Technology 56 (2014) 1493 –1507