Open Source or Open Season?

[JakeD]

I visit the L.A. section of http://www.metroblogging.com on a daily basis, and found a gentleman reporting that some Los Angeles City Council members are trying to pass a motion to use open source software (rock on) instead of spending millions of dollars on commercial software, and instead diverting the funds to the LAPD. I think this is a great idea, and I really hope that the Council goes for it. Not only will it provide the police force with some seriously-needed funding, but it will one-up open source software and programmers and hopefully give them more clout in an unforgiving scene dominated by Microsoft and Apple.

What are your thoughts about open-source software, and do you think that more cities should implement it and use the funds for something more important?

[Thaum1el]

That completely depends - is the city ready to put down the time, effort and - if there are such - costs to re-educate those that can hardly use the commercial software, on the new system and the problems those might create?

[Poseidon]

Open source has it's own disadventages. For one thing... it doesn't offer as good of integration between itself. On the other hand, it will not appear untill people start using it. More people using Open Source stuff will make propriatary software to improve and maybe drop in price, while improving the open source software as well. It is a good thing for everyone.

[Thaum1el]

Absolutely, I completely agree on that. I just wanted to point out that to begin with, it would be an enterprise, the first "generation" will face the child-hood diseases that will happen to such an undertaking - and the risque that others won't follow the initiative - and will have to deal with these kinds of problems. That doesn't mean that it's not a step to take. I'm just wondering who will be bold enough to take it.

[Moon-Light]

I think in some cases there will be no training required, but in most it naturally will, it all depends on what the end user needs like say for example microsoft office, there is the free open source OpenOffice.org program which is pretty much a clone of microsoft software.

I dunno what its like over there but over here we get people like microsoft and the like sponsoring our universities and that kind of thing and giving them free software and the like, and naturally all the students and that are taught how to learn microsoft software so really open source software doesn't get a look in, but that said yeah I think councils and government organisations should use open software a whole lot more, it isn't that much harder to use, the support is a bit non existant if you do not pay for it, but were in the day and age of the internet there is very little you cant find help with online, and if not what the government or councils saved in going open source a small percentage of that could go to some support for there new systems, and the rest put to a much better use.

[Evilpoptart]

LONG LIVE SOURCEFORGE!!!!

[Unforgiven]

While I'll be the first to admit there isn't a open source equivelent for every program out there that's just as good (ever try using Gimp instead of Photoshop before?), for most things there are, and especially if you're just a MS Office user, pft, come on.

How many hundreds of dollars in software alone is it to set up a single workstation with MS Windows XP Pro, and MS Office XP? $500-$600? I honestly don't know, never bought Office before. Know why?

AbiWord is lighter and just as good as MS Word in every respect I've come across (although I admit, I'm not a power user in that area).

Open Office also handles damn near every aspect of a standard MS Office set up, and soon will even have it's own MS Access-like database functionality.

Fuck it. $600+ or Free? Pop a copy of Mandrake or SuSE Linux on there with Open Office, and use that. Free, Stable, and.... did I mention free?

[Thaum1el]

Sure, I agree.
The only problem I can see is still cash. The open source market can provide for an alternative for lower price, when it comes to HUGE projects such as an entire state's system. But when we come up to those levels, it's going to be very difficult to have it completely free - it's still major business. Having said that, as I begun, open source can create the same result for a lower price. But no longer for free, I believe. Unless you'll hire someone that will download the distro and software, copy it to the hundereds of puters in a state system, and have it running.

[Unforgiven]

Thaum, I don't see what you mean.

You can download debian a million times if you want, it's still free.

[Thaum1el]

Thaum, I don't see what you mean.

You can download debian a million times if you want, it's still free.
Yes. I know. But if you have a system so vast as the state of California, for example, you'll need to have a few hundered thousand copies - and you will still need to pay someone who will get the copies and distribute them over that entire net - the software is free, but that doesn't mean that the process of exchanging systems and software state-wide is.

[Unforgiven]

And anything else is any differant?

It'd be cheaper than anything MS could pull off.

[Poseidon]

There is also an issue of support. Support for the operating system, support for the software, etc.. . Either it's the cost of hiring a lot of admins who know all that, or hiring a company that provides support. Software is on its way to becoming free. It's the service that's going to cost major money.

[audiedoggie]

all i can say is that as a designer that is forced to pay WAY too much for industry standard software, i love open source software. open source is why i use MySQL. as some of you probably know its an open source database which is way easy to set up and code! i love it! now if only the adobe and macromedia suites were that way..........

[Unforgiven]

MySQL is nice, even if it lacks some things.

They really needs something on par with Photoshop that's open source, too. Gimp just doesn't quite do it.

[Sterling]

The sticker price of the software is a fraction of the total cost of a software project. The majority of the costs are in training, support, and maintenance. You're going to want a commercial vendor to provide those services, regardless of whether you use open source software or not. There are some advantages (and disadvantages) to open source solutions, but the straight saving on the sticker price of the software itself isn't really as big a deal as you would imagine.

[Sterling]

I also think the legislating for one development model over another is stupid and uncompetitive. Why should proprietary vendors be excluded from bidding? Just let everyone bid on a level playing field.

If there are things they think that they will get from open source, like better prices, or interoperability, or support, then just specify those as requirements when you invite bids for a system. If a proprietary vendor can deliver what you want at the best price, then why shouldn't you go with their system?

[Poseidon]

open source has no owner.. how do they bid?

Yes, there are companies that provide support for open source software. But there are limited number of them. Untill the use is more widespread, there isn't anyone from Open Source side who can really "bid".

[Sterling]

open source has no owner.. how do they bid?

But you're not buying software, you're buying a complete solution. The solution may contain software, but that's not necessarily the important piece. And for those complete solutions, there most definitely are companies selling you packages that contain open-source components.

Here's how it works: let's say you're a big company, or some branch of the government, and you want a software system for something. You don't just get one of your IT employees to download some software off the net and start randomly deploying it.

Instead what you do is you invite bids from a bunch of solution providers. These are IT consultancies, like IBM, Accenture or Cap Gemini. They'll put together a package for you, including all the software, training, deployment, support services, and so forth. And they'll compete for your business. The software they recommnend is going to differ in each bid. One of them might suggest a solution built on, say, Microsoft Windows, whereas another might recommend a solution based on Linux. Sometimes there will be a mix of open-source and proprietary software in the package.

In any case, you get to compare the bids, and see which one best meets your needs at the most attractive price.

I don't really see any reason to legislate that governments can't buy proprietary software. Restricting the kinds of bids that you are allowed to consider cuts competition, and therefore is worse value for the taxpayer in the long-run.

[Diva]

I've been to several meetings with different companies all trying to contract with us. We tried out different software and then had to be trained on it. I have had to contact their support center numerous times, too. It's definately a decision that shouldn't be taken lightly.

[Thaum1el]

I've been to several meetings with different companies all trying to contract with us. We tried out different software and then had to be trained on it. I have had to contact their support center numerous times, too. It's definately a decision that shouldn't be taken lightly.

My point exactly. Some people that has followed this thread might believe that I am against the concept of free software. But those who know me also knows that nothing can be more wrong. I've been advocating the system for long, babbling about "The cathedral and the bazaar" for years, cheered on anything Linux by principle for yonks, etc. I even used Linux once :P Serisouly, I ran a RedHat 6.2 when that one was new. However, due to my own lack of intelligence and patience, well, it didn't work out to well, and of course much has happened since.

So, yes, I think it would be excellent if everyone started using open source, and we alll could get extremely good, free and liberating software everywhere. As much as I think it would be marvellous if we all could live in peace in a world where there's no poverty, disease or injusttice.

But choosing such an alternative is a big undertaking. And there are pro's and con's of open software as with everything else, and if the state is involved, which has a lot of big responsibilities, those con's have to be taken into concideration as well.

That's why I vote Diva for President! She summed up this post of mine in a more compact - and probably more information intense and interesting - package.