Live, from Madrid, Spain, it's theCUBE. Covering HPE Discover Madrid 2017, brought to you by Hewlett Packard Enterprise. We're back in Espanol, theCUBE, the leader in live tech coverage is here covering HPE Discover Madrid day one. I'm Dave Vellante with my co-host, Peter Burris. Well, it's all coming at the focus, Peter. We've got- It actually is. It is, I mean, it better be after five or six years, but it's taken longer than I had hoped, but the story is consistent now. The last four discovers, despite the some of the distractions of spin merges and so forth, the story of hybrid IT, the intelligence edge, bringing automation is somewhat new to the data center. Services led. Strategy actually makes sense. Yeah, and we talked about at the top of the show today, the spectrum. We're running AWS re-invent, get a big presence there. Obviously, it's affected the entire industry. And then you've got HPE, the likes of HPE, Dell, EMC to a certain extent, IBM, basically not giving up, saying, wait, wait a minute, these are our customers. They want cloud on-prem. We're going to deliver to them. They want cloud in the cloud. We'll help them get there. Oracle. Oracle as well. Oracle, different strategy. We should talk about that a little bit, but summarize, synthesize your take on the day and where we're at with HPE. So I would say that the, that what we talked about this morning was when Meg first took over the reins, she stopped a whole bunch of stuff, and HPE stopped spending and behaving like a company that believed that it had to get scale as fast as possible because that was the only way to win. And she ended up going back to, look, let's focus on the customers and what the customers are trying to do and not how we're trying to leverage our assets. And it kind of took a pause. And for a while, you could kind of see them start putting things back together. And you kind of had a sense of where it was all going to go. But this has been kind of the coming out party for what the last five years have been about. And as you said, I think we've seen the three core messages that certainly line up with a little bit of caveat here. This is, their story is very much aligned with what we think the industry needs to see right now. At least our research suggests. You're going to need true private cloud, the ability to put the cloud service where your data requires and not force your business to move its data to some cloud's location. You're going to need increased automation within your IT organization because you're not going to be able to support these more complex workloads if you don't find ways to increase the productivity of the people. And even more importantly, dramatically reduce even the possibility of a failure. And that's what AI inside IT is all about. And very importantly, the idea that you've got to put more intelligence at the edge, that that interface between the real world and the digital world is really what's going to drive the dynamic in the computing industry over the next few years. And HP has shown up and it's not just talking about it, they're showing it. And that's, it's nice to be there. Well, it's interesting, Meg Whitman came by and was talking to us and we were talking about the Aruba acquisition.  You could show some growth. And it was a way to compete with Cisco and differentiate because they were trying to compete head to head with Cisco and it's going okay, but not great. Aruba gave them a clear differentiator and then all of a sudden the edge became this tailwind and it kind of got them there early. Well, let's remember what Mark Hurd talked about. He said, well, you know, why are you going after the network world? Well, I like their 67% gross margins. Okay, so- Talk about 3Com. No, he's talking about 3Com. He's talking about all the things that HP did as it tried to get into the network. Cisco, right. It was purely driven by gross margin. They didn't quite have the customer story down. Aruba has always been a great customer story. They've always said, look, this is your business challenge.  This is your security issues. On and on and on. They had three or four concrete value propositions that just worked for customers. That acquisition at the time it happened, it happened about the same time that HP was starting to rededicate itself back to thinking about its customer base. So it's not surprising to me that that integration or that merger has been one of the more successful that HP's undertaken. So again, the spectrum.  And you're right, it does align with a lot of things that we've been saying around true private cloud and so forth. Jassy doesn't buy it. Me flat out says this is old guard thinking, trying to hang on to the past. But our analysis suggests it's not just old guard thinking, it's customer thinking because they can't just move their business into the cloud. Thoughts? Totally agree. So I'd say there's a couple things about it. It's customer thinking based on the realities of the data assets that they're trying to leverage as they transform into digital business. Data is real and it has, it's going to weigh in on how your infrastructure looks and the edge is going to have characteristics. It means that you're going to have to do automation right there, right where the action is. You're not going to be able to send it up to the cloud all the time. There's going to be a lot of business events that take place in that core and that second tier. So it's not that it's old versus new guard and here's why I'd say that, Dave. It's because in many respects, we're giving some props to HP right now, which is great, but in many respects the story that HP is telling today is a story that is still being largely, has largely been told, largely fashioned by what AWS has done over the last 10 years. And that is, here's what the cloud experience is. And now HP's adding and you want that cloud experience whatever your data demands. The difference therefore between the old guard and the new guard or the old way and the new way on premise is that it used to be, it was pretty clear to me and I think it was pretty clear to us that the old, that the talk about private cloud was simply a way of thinking about how to put new marketing spin on the enhancement, upgrade, replacement cycle for servers and storage. And that had, that did not work. It just flat out didn't work. Well, it worked in the sense that it froze the market a little bit. It froze the market a little bit. Overall, for the past five or six years the growth has been slowing down pretty dramatically. So I would say that the data is pretty unassailable. You're not going to move everything to a central location. So, but you're going to want that cloud experience. And so the question is, are we going to see great cloud experience where the physics, the legality and the intellectual property governance demands that you put your data? Well, I thought Jesse Saint Laurent was going to talk about the next wave. He mentioned multi-cloud. And he's CTO of- Of SimpliVity now, HPE Hyperconversion. Right. I thought he was going to talk about, he said the next wave is Hyper-V. Okay, check. I mean, that's like to me a feature of the product. And then he sort of talked about multi-cloud. And that's really where I thought he was going to go because when you look at what AWS is doing, and I've always contended, they're years ahead. We can debate how many, five, seven, three, probably closer to five than three. But where they're headed is serverless, functional programming, stateless, new programming models. It's all about the developer to those guys. And that's the parlance that they speak in. The Hyperconverge guys all talk in VM terms. And that's not how Amazon talks or thinks. So the question is, is that the next wave? And can the enterprise guys talk to the developer? Yeah, can they catch that wave? So, you know, I think, look, let's be honest, AWS is a great company. There's no question about it. They've done things that a lot of old style infrastructure jocks thought that couldn't be done and they did it. And they continue to demonstrate that they are really engaging their customers and turning that insight knowledge into great services. So this is not a knock on AWS. But what ultimately has to, and I think AWS recognizes this as well, because they're starting to talk a lot about IoT and their approach to IoT, recognizing that not all the data is going to be sourced up in the cloud. The data is going to be generated in a lot of other places and they have to participate there as well. So from our perspective, ultimately, we would say that multicloud, the ability to naturally place your data where the data needs to be placed, which is increasingly is going to be closer to the event that needs to be automated, that needs to have that high quality experience, is going to be the way, it's going to be the dominant factor in determining the characteristics of the application infrastructure that you put in place. And we'll see what happens. Serverless, yeah, serverless is great. You can do a lot with it. But you can also still build junky applications with serverless. Microservices are great. Yeah, but you can still build junky applications. Microservices. A lot of those services aren't so micro as Neil Ray did. That's exactly right. So you can still do bad stuff in the cloud. So at the end of the day, the whole point is to get a new compact between business people who have the vision of the digital services and digital capabilities they want, IT professionals and developers who are going to generate, create that value and then infrastructure people who are not, who are allowing the data and the workload to fall where it naturally should fall and then making it possible for the industry to work together. Because that's what users want. Okay, so let me ask a question differently. We agree that the cloud guys generally, Amazon specifically, is ahead of the enterprise guys when it comes to infrastructure. Yeah, there's no question there. Okay, is the lead extending or is it dwindling? Amazon's lead? Well, so look, you have Amazon's lead, first off you have to think about Amazon's lead relative to Microsoft, Oracle and others. And they're not as far ahead as, they're not that far ahead of Microsoft. So there's a real battle raging there. Google has at least as good a relationship with a lot of developers as Amazon does. When you think about what a lot of developers are building in the cloud experience, they're using Kubernetes, so using TensorFlow. They're increasingly going to use Itzio. I mean, so it's not, it's, there's going to be increased energy being put forward to try to talk about how that cloud innovation is going to happen. So those are the three hyper cloud guys. Those are the three hyper cloud guys. And as we talked about, they increasingly are defining what the cloud experience is. I think what we're seeing now is the enterprise guys stepping back and saying, you know what? We have to define our role in the cloud experience and not presume that we're going to tell everybody what the cloud experience is. Which is what they were doing for many years and they failed out. And you can make an argument that HPE as a smaller company with less assets to encumber them, can actually deliver that through partnerships, maybe not as profitably, most definitely not as profitably, but actually can deliver that outcome for customers. Hey, we'll see. We'll see because. You can make that argument. Well, you can make that argument, but remember we're moving from and even HPE announced some stuff today with GreenLake, moving from a product orientation increasingly to a service orientation. And there's demonstration that you can do things with your business model that may allow you to do things in different levels of profitability at some where, you know, when you take more of a services approach to things. So the, I think the most important message that we can leave from today is that our observation on that notion of a spectrum from, you know, public, put it on public to a true private orientation, which is hybrid, where an on-premise play is going to be essential, that spectrum seems to be real. Number one, number two, however, it doesn't mean that AWS in particular is not going to be successful at driving the definition of the cloud experience. And number three, we're now seeing at least one company, but we're also starting to see indications of others, acknowledge that their role in all of this will be to take whatever the leaders in cloud are talking about and make it possible, that experience possible, where the data requires, and that will include on-premise. So, and I agree with you, AWS is defining that cloud experience. And so as Anna Pinzok was speaking, I just wrote down, I jotted down any sort of AWS cloud experience, which they've defined an HPE cloud experience. So I got pay-as-you-go, this sort of flex capacity, is it kind of? I mean, it's as close as you can probably get. Green Lake. Yeah, Green Lake, it's kind of. Something we all need to learn more about, but it's getting there, it's getting there. But it will never get there entirely, right? Because they're going to require you to be, by a year's worth of capacity and thresholds, you're going to have thresholds above and threshold below. Except we also heard, again, I think there's more, I don't want to, I think you're right. If you want, it's not 100% of what it is. We start throwing the balance sheet and finances in there and how you're going to do it. So we'll come back to that. So Elastic, again, kind of, you know, to a point. Integrated services, like tons of them, like thousands a year, there's some of those, but as I was saying before, HP's ecosystem play allows them to pick and choose. Yeah, but remember Dave, okay, keep going, keep going. Security, sort of, let's call it the Amazon way. Here's our security, it's good, but take it or leave it. And then the HP approach is your way, HPE. You have security your way. If that's the edict of the organization, we can map to that. One cloud versus multi-cloud. Obviously HPE's got a multi-cloud strategy, Amazon doesn't, they don't care about managing multi-clouds, they care about managing their cloud. And then services as a service, HPE can deliver that and Amazon, I got a question mark, it's their ecosystem that's delivering those services. So I guess the point is, and I'm making is, maybe it's not the exact replica of the Amazon experience, but there are attributes of it which appeal to enterprise IT. Which Amazon is really not interested in delivering. And Ergo, the assumption is, my assumption is that, that business, that on-prem business, will be here for a long, long time. Absolutely. Indefinitely. And we would agree with that. In fact, we think, ultimately, that there's going to be enough uniqueness about how businesses use their data and treat their data, that we expect to see this notion of true private cloud actually be a bigger, overall piece of the marketplace, than the one size fits all, with a degree of customization possible that Amazon's providing. But again, this is, we have to be careful here. Because as analysts, we're kind of naturally falling into this trap of setting up AWS and HP or any of these folks in opposition. There are companies that have very, very different opposed visions of how this is going to play out. Specifically, we can talk about Amazon saying, it's all going to be IAAS, and we're going to put pass in there. And then, you know, increasingly obviously, Microsoft and Oracle saying, oh no, we're going to have application clouds.  What we see today is not in opposition to the AWS vision. It's not. It is a, okay, great. But for this type of work, for this type of data, this type of workload, this type of reality, chances are you're going to need to put this type of stuff here, and have it fit into the overall motion of cloud experience. And it doesn't have to be a complete substitute. It just has to work for that class of workload. But bringing it back to HP and then we're going to wrap is, HPE does not have an application cloud. They don't. And as a result, it's going to be in a knife fight with Amazon, with Dell EMC, and with China. It's going to be in a knife fight with companies that are like it. China, you know, Huawei, Dell EMC, Cisco. You're right, you're right. Amazon's setting the pricing tone and the business model tone. Look, right now it's Amazon and Microsoft are helping to set the stage of what this is all going to look like. So again, bottom line is, you know, it's not a 60% gross margin company, Mark Herd's vision of going to compete with Cisco. It's a 25 to 32%. It's really focused on customer problems. It's focused on customer problems. It throws off a couple billion dollars of cash. It can eke out a little bit of growth. That's what it is. Not a bad business. No, it's a great business actually. All right, Pete, thanks for the wrap on day one. We'll be back tomorrow, 8.30 AM local time, right? Roughly, 8.45 local time. Check out thecube.net where you'll see this show. You'll see the other shows that we're doing, including, you know, Reinvent, John Furrier and the crew are over there today. That's a wrap for day one. This is theCUBE. We'll see you tomorrow.


Prindex figures show that in Costa Rica, tenure security for renters and owners is very strong. Regarding collective rights, though, things are not well. Despite 40-year-old legislation and injunctions by the Inter-American Human Rights Commission, indigenous groups are still waiting to get their land back from illegal settlers. But the state is passive and lives are affected, even in the worst possible way. Two indigenous rights defenders were killed over the past year. The suspects are free on bail, and land restitution remains a distant dream.


Good morning traders, Patrick Manley here with another tick mill chart hit and I'm sure your attention this morning to a developing opportunity in the euro dollar. As discussed in the weekly market outlook it appears we are in wave 5 advance beginning here in the euro from the 116 low. As we hold that 116 we have a projected 121.19 fifth wave upside objective. The trade for me today will be going long through the overnight highs with a pretty nice risk reward here using a stock just below the weekly pivot at 118.50 looking for a retest of the prior cycle highs at 120 and then as this 119.20 area then acts as support I'm looking for a final move up into the target zone of 121.19. As always traders plan the trade, most importantly manage your risk. Until next time, thanks very much.


Somebody, Param asks, I'm not sure if he's from India or it's an Asian currency he's paying in. So he says, why shouldn't COVID patents be removed if it can help countries like India? You know, assume that vaccine production does go up in the next few months because the patent are removed. Why is that a bad thing? So again, because removing patents will not increase vaccine manufacturing or distribution. It helps the elimination of patents helps zero people. There is no evidence. I just want to emphasize why I started off by saying there is no evidence that patents are a blockade or are preventing anyone from getting access to COVID-19 drugs or the vaccines. Now, why do you then, then you could say, well then if there's no evidence of what's the problem, right? Because then just get eliminated. Well, because then you're eliminating vital foundational property rights that are the basis for the vaccines that have been created in the first place and have been distributed. And you're eliminating the property rights that make possible the commercial agreements, the information sharing agreements. But as I mentioned, Biotech has partnered with Pfizer. That partnership was on the foundation of patents because it's property rights that serve the basis, the foundation for all commercial agreements. All agreements that are peaceful and are value producing between people are contractual agreements that are transfers of property interest. And if you eliminate property, then you eliminate the ability to have those types of peaceful, possible, commercial enhancing value enhancing contracts. Absolutely. And you eliminate freedom. I mean, think about the slippery slope, right? Indians also need iPhones. I mean, they really need iPhones. I mean, why shouldn't we just force Apple to license its IP so the Indian manufacturer can stop producing iPhones? Or India needs money. Why don't we redistribute all the money we have in the, again, it's pretty rich still. Couldn't we just redistribute all the money? I mean, need, once you make need the standard. Yes. You're willing to violate property rights even if it's just one time, right? Because the need is great. You've established the precedent that need is the standard and private property rights don't matter. You're done. You're done in terms of freedom. And the other side has always understood this, right? I mean, Mark's understood this, right? Hungry man is not free, right? And, you know, and what the very first thing AOC tweeted when the Biden administration announced that it was supporting its wave reposals, we're going to do insulin next. Because there's always an emergency, right? There's always someone somewhere in the world who's not getting a drug that they quote need, unquote. Insulin, by the way, patent expired a long time ago. So it's in the public domain already. Well, and, you know, and, and the fact that we have massive amounts of insulin is entirely the result of this biotech innovation that was created that was served as the foundation for the company Genentech, the very first actual company that was successful, now a multi-billion dollar biopharmaceutical company that was created on this ability to bioengineer insulin. It's why, but diabetes today is not a death sentence. 30 years ago, if you were diagnosed with diabetes, that was largely a death sentence for you. You would, your life was now measured in decades as an adult or years as a child. It's now today an entirely manageable condition because of patents. Yep. Yep. So why, so, you know, we always get this question, why is insulin so expensive? Yeah, that's a, it's a, another, another, yeah, another, because patents are such the easy go to, you know, whipping boy, the old, you know, term for any problem, you know, for the World Health Organization came out before I get to insulin, just want to mention this, you know, and said, oh, well, the real problem in the developing world is patents. We really have to get rid of patents. By the way, they came out with this statement three years ago. And the current estimate is the World Health Organization has a list of the most essential medicines necessary. You know, the medicines that treat cholera and diphtherias, 95% of them are off patent. 95% of them have zero patents on them whatsoever. So clearly patents are not the reason why these medicines are not getting to people in the developing world, which goes back to my earlier comment about lack of infrastructure and distribution and developing countries. So insulin is a great example, a great example. It's entirely a byproduct of government regulations that controls again. So, so, you know, again, the, if you want to create a competing product to compete against insulin, you have to get FDA approval. And, and, and the FDA holds up the people and prevents people from creating competing products. There's all, you know, because like I said, there's no patent, the patents, Genentech's patent on how to mass produce through bioengineering. Insulin expired years ago, decades ago. So, and so it's, it's largely, you know, a byproduct of regulatory controls. And also it's just a byproduct, you know, it, and it's also in part a byproduct of that it's knowledge and know how that makes it possible to create these things. You can't just all of a sudden say, all right, I want to create it. And I'm going to do it tomorrow. I mean, this is really cutting your stuff. People don't realize these types of treatments, these types of drugs, you know, even EpiPens. I mean, this is really cutting edge technology. These are the, these are Ferraris in the biopharmaceutical context, right? And, you know, and everyone's is going, no one goes around saying, why can't my, a Ferrari cost the amount of a Honda or a Toyota? We all know why, right? We should be recognizing the exact same fact when it comes to medical care. People don't need Ferraris, but they need EpiPens. And, and the funny thing is EpiPens is a good example where there was a competitor, a European competitor and the FDA wouldn't allow them. So, you know, again, it's, it's a barrier to entry the FDA creates, not the market creates. And it's, and all in the EpiPen one is another example where again, like patents got totally blamed for something the patents had nothing to do with. So one of the reasons why EpiPen became so expensive and became so prevalent was because Congress passed a law about 15 years ago mandating that any institution that receives federal funding has to have an epinephrine available in case someone in that, at that location has an allergic reaction. And they used in the statute the word EpiPen. Now, if you're, if you are a recipient of federal funds and a statute says you have to provide epinephrine, it doesn't say epinephrine, it says EpiPen. And you want to make sure you don't lose your federal funds. What's the most risk adverse thing you do? You buy an EpiPen. I mean, and so the federal government basically just created a massive demand for EpiPens. And what happens when you have massive demand? Prices go up. I mean, so it's just another example of just a way in which the government kind of mucked things up on top of the, on top of the regulatory controls, because what you're on side is exactly right. The FDA has also refused, you know, a approval for generic, you know, quote, generic unquote versions of EpiPen to be made available. So is not giving up for me. Here's from India. There's an Indian I'm deeply concerned because my COVID, because the COVID in my country is worse than it was last year. And if, if patients, if patents should be removed, should not be removed, how do we help countries like India to move beyond the pandemic? Licensing agreements, right? I mean, as you said, there's no shortage. Yeah, I mean, so let me, let me emphasize this again. So even before you had the explosion in, in the cases in India, that AstraZeneca had entered into a licensing deal with the serum Institute of India to manufacture its, its, its vaccine. Even, I mean, they are manufacturing the vaccine in India right now as we speak. And, and eliminating the patents doesn't magically produce more vaccines tomorrow to help the people who are currently sick or dying. I mean, if we had, if we had eliminated the regulatory restrictions and the trade restrictions and all the things that prevented India getting access to these, these vaccines before. And by the way, and if India itself had provided reliable and effective patent right protection for biopharmaceutical innovations, because they've been dragged that country kicking and screaming into protecting biopharmaceutical protections. They are one of the world's largest copies of biopharmaceutical industry. They're known as this, they're known as the, actually India is known as the, as the pharmacy of the world. Because they, that's where they just mass produce lots of, lots of generic drugs. You know, that, you know, if they had actually had a system that we, that showed they respected these interests, so perhaps there would have been more people willing beyond just AstraZeneca to license in the country, their know-how and their knowledge and things of that sort. You wouldn't, then you would have had all of the resources already there and ready to go when you had your explosion of cases. Absolutely. I mean, the problem in India is India. The problem in India is lack of property right protection. It's lack of free markets. It's lack of respect for patents. And of course, the fact that you just don't have the manufacturing capabilities to produce, you've got a billion plus people and you don't have the enough manufacturing capabilities to produce all the vaccines. The only part of this that I'm sympathetic is the trade restrictions of restricting India from importing the vaccine. The United States seems to right now have a surplus because we've got a lot of anti-vaxxers in the US who are not going to get vaccinated. So there's massive production in the US that's going nowhere. You could ship it to India. It's expensive, particularly the Pfizer because of the kind of temperatures you would have to hold it, but you could ship it to India. You could fly it to India.  So if you want to complain about something, complain about the trade issues and complain about your own government, your own government not providing the kind of property right protections that you would need to ramp up production. And I want to also emphasize that this is always the problem with, well, this is an emergency. We'll eliminate the rights in this instance to immediately address this problem. So let's say, assume like this would magically lead to people getting vaccines tomorrow, which it wouldn't in India. But as Iran and I talked about, there's always an emergency somewhere. And the signal that you've just sent to every producer and innovator is the moment that we have pushed enough by someone that there is an emergency need somewhere that their rights will no longer be respected. Their response is, understandably, I'm not going to produce it. Why should I spend over two and a half billion dollars, 10 to 15 years of tens of thousands of innovative productive hours trying to come up with cures for hepatitis, treatments for diabetes. These are, by the way, now manageable conditions that were death sentences. If they're just going to be stolen from me the moment someone needs it, unquote. What we need today, what I called a new intellectual would be any man or woman who is willing to think. Meaning any man or woman who knows that man's life must be guided by reason, by the intellect, not by feelings, wishes, wins or mystic revelations. Any man or woman who values his life and who does not want to give in to today's cult of despair, cynicism and impotence, and does not intend to give up the world to the dark ages and to the role of the collectivist roads. All right, before we go on, reminder, please like the show. We've got 163 live listeners right now. 30 likes. That should be at least 100. I figure at least 100 of you actually like the show. Maybe they're like 60 of the Matthews out there who hate it, but at least the people who are liking it, I want to see a thumbs up. There you go. Start liking it. I want to see that go to 100. All it takes is a click of a thing, whether you're looking at this. You know the likes matter. It's not an issue of my ego. It's an issue of the algorithm. The more you like something, the more the algorithm likes it. If you don't like the show, give it a thumbs down. Let's see your actual views being reflected in the likes. But if you like it, don't just sit there, help get the show promoted. Of course, you should also share and you can support the show at your own book show.com slash support on Patreon or subscribe star or locals and show you support for all for the work, for the value, hopefully you're receiving from this.  You'll know what shows are on when they're on. You're good notified. So yes, like, share, subscribe, support. Like, share, subscribe, support. There you go. Easy. Do one, all of those please.


Hi, Community Moderator Ben Cotton here with your open-source.com top 5 for the week of July 20th, 2017. It's pretty hot here where I am right now, so once you join me with your favorite cold beverage, let's take a look at this week's articles. Coming in at number 5 this week is Neo4j and graph databases getting started. Community Moderator Ruth Holloway gives an introduction to graph databases. This is the second in a three-part series, so be sure to check out all of the articles. At number 4 Lessons in OpenStack, New Tutorials and How-To's. Editor Jason Baker rounds up some of the best OpenStack guides and tutorials published recently. If you want to learn more about OpenStack, these articles are a good place to start. Looking for a new career? This week's number 3 article is Paul English's Why You Should Be Assisted Men. If you haven't considered system administration, or even if you have, then give this article a read. Speaking of system administration, Jim Hall presents Linux to the Rescue, how I introduced my organization to Linux. A story of how Linux allowed the University of Minnesota to keep its course registration system available after they got twice the expected load. And the top article this week comes to us from Jimmy Shuland, who shares four reasons he uses DWM for his window manager. Jimmy likes the efficiency and minimalism of DWM. If DWM isn't your kind of minimalism, be sure to read the comments for other suggestions. Well, my thirst is quenched, and just in time, because those five articles were the only five in this week's Top 5. Join us again next week for another Top 5 from opensource.com.