I greatly enjoyed OSCON 2008. But I won’t attend OSCON 2009, because its locale was moved from Portland to San Jose.
I lived in San Jose for six months, when I worked for a former employer. (Maybe it was nine months… That job is fortunately a distant fuzzy memory.) Deciding whether to attend a conference involves many tradeoffs; one of which is, of course, its location. My negativity about San Jose is sufficiently strong to move this decision into the “No” column. (If you’ve never been there, I have one word for you: Concrete.)
O’Reilly’s official reasons for moving it to San Jose didn’t sounded very convincing to me. Or to a lot of other people. Allison Randal makes a, “Bigger is better, and OSCON will forever keep growing at 20%/year, so we needed a bigger venue” argument. I don’t buy it, because (a) bigger isn’t better, and (b) growth won’t continue at the same pace. This would be true even without a terrible recession bearing down on us. Growth never continues at the same pace forever; if it did, Microsoft‘s revenue would now be greater than the combined GDP of every country on the planet. Simply extrapolating the past is how Conventional Wisdom fails.
Anyway. Whatever. My opinions are very distant from being interesting to anyone at O’Reilly. I was looking forward to it, but I’ll find other ways to use the time that would have been OSCON 2009.