boh has a point. will centralisation of ict officers also mean centralisation of services and of ict budgets ?
On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 10:01 AM, <jipangmenje...@gmail.com> wrote: > welcome back, boh! glad to see your replies again..I mean it :P > Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device via Vodafone-Celcom Mobile. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Boh Yap <bhy...@gmail.com> > Sender: osdcmy-list@googlegroups.com > Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2012 18:12:26 > To: <osdcmy-list@googlegroups.com> > Reply-To: osdcmy-list@googlegroups.com > Subject: Re: [osdcmy] Re: JEMPUTAN SEBAGAI PEMBENTANG DI SESI EKSKLUSIF > CIO - > BENGKEL SELF RELIANCE PROGRAM OPEN SOURCE SOFTWARE (OSS) SEKTOR AWAM FASA > III > - SIRI 3 > > hi all, > > Firstly, I apologise for coming into this late, have not been > following OSDC list much lately, work... then Red1 pulled me into > this. > > So gathering some facts from above, here is my rant. > > 1. Centralized IT > > Need to rethink, centralization offers benefits like economies of > scale, standardisation, leveraging/creating pools of expertise > (building ecosystems)... > > But this has got to be different from the mainframe era, with big > vendors, technology lock-in, proprietry standards and hardware... > > What the 'New Centralization' should be; it should leverage the > latest technology, cloud based computing, ubiqious mobile devices, > prevalent broadband internet. > > Why? > ---- > Centralising computing much as you would cemtralise utillities, like > water, power etc... Such utillities are considered infrastructure, > essential for economic development. Much as our current current > economic strength was due to the foresight of earlier government to > spend on developing the physical infrastructue of roads, ports, power, > water... which in turn attracted DFI (direct foreign investment) which > inturn led to our economic prosperity. That was phase 1, which was > essentially emphasizing on 'hardware' or physical infra. > > Phase 2: is about building 'Knowledge based' economy. The enablers for > that is ICT infra, that would allow knowledge and services to 'flow' > just as roads and ports allowed physical goods to flow. Hence > computing resources - as represented by cloud-computing, broadband > (wireless) telecommunications, mobile devices are the way to go. > > These, are still 'hard' infra, easy to build, just spend money and do > a bit of planning. The development of the 'soft-assets' is more > difficult, it includes fixing Education, and devloping ecosystems of > IT expertise, SW development, mobile solutions, cloud-computer admins, > network & security... Then you need domain experts.. > > > Easily available infra - leads to innovation > -------------------------------------------- > > A prominent Silicon Valley VC, in a talk, mentioned the low-cost of > computing leads to the rapid growth of innovation and new start-up > companies. He specifically mentioned the low-cost of PC/laptops and > zero-cost of FOSS. But to deploy and beta-test a product, hosting > costs are still high, particularly in Malaysia. Lowering hosting costs > via cloud based infra, would lower costs further, leverage > efficiencies for wider systems deployment and allow many more > innovators to participate. > > Start-ups/innovators can quickly & cheaply develop, test, deploy their > prodctt. Cheaper startup costs allow more people to participate. There > will be a faster cycle, from conception to success/failure. This leads > to a more efficient Darwinian evolution, weeding out the weak, > quickly. (note: failure itself is not a bad thing, it teaches valuable > lessons that lead to success) > > Thus you build a healthy eco-system. > > > How this will help government? > ------------------------------ > I'll use a 'scenario' to illustrate: > > Min. of Health (it could be any other..) has a 'cloud' infra, based on > OSS (e.g. OpenStack) and wants to explore some new solutions, > computerization of the rapidly expanding 1Malaysa clinics... > > They put out a RFP with the following terms: > > - must use FOSS > > - code that's implemented/deployed must be open-sourced > (not free, and IP rights belong to respective developers) > > - based on open API and standards, > (for security and auhorization, for data storage > for data interchange, medical standars...) > > - MOH to define the standards to use, requiremnts specs, > performance specs, etc... They should not define tools, ie: > what DB, what language... > > - teams that accept the RFP, to put up a beta/prototype on a server > > - infra will be provided, development servers/tools, > test servers - all based on MOH-cloud > > (a small fee may be paid to development teams, or it can be made > into a competition. 200-300k for such a fee for a few million $ > project is not unreasonble. A junket trip arranged by vendors to > 'tour' overseas facilities would easily cost 100k plus! Which > the vendor already built into the final purchase price! ) > > > What are the benefits: > ---------------------- > - create/breed a rich ecosystem of developers/innovators based on > merits and capability > > - open competition, many teams compete > > - MOH gets to test and evaluate various products > and picks the ones that are most suitable and works. > > - MOH can even 'mix-match' modules from the different competing > teams. Because everything is based on open standards, tools. > ie: Not difficult to port PHP/mySQL app to Python/Postgres > and vv. Or buld a higher level layer that consolidates data > into a big centralised database, for centralise reference > OLTP and reporting, letting the invidual apps' DB handle > transactional needs. > > (A cost model will have to be determined for the above > methodology, not unsolvable among the OSS community.) > > - deployment will be really easy, as it was developed on the > same infra, > > - Procurement is simplified, no need for purchase of complex > configs, SW license/sizing. Just buy more storage, CPUs for > the cloud, standard items. > > - Scale-up is a non-issue. > > - Costs will be low, weed out 'lemons', things that don't > work before implementation (and fix them), not after. > > > Is the above scenario too idealistic? Not really, its is doable, but > it needs a serious change of mindset! > > There are still many 'holes' that need to be filled before the above > scenario is workable, > > Care to discuss?, > > > > > -- > #------- > regds, > > Boh Heong, Yap > > -- > To unsubscribe from and detail about this group > http://portal.mosc.my/osdc-my-mailing-list-information > > OSDC.my Discussion Group In Facebook > http://www.facebook.com/groups/osdcmalaysia/ > > Malaysia Open Source Conference 2012 > MOSC2012 http://portal.mosc.my/ > > -- > To unsubscribe from and detail about this group > http://portal.mosc.my/osdc-my-mailing-list-information > > OSDC.my Discussion Group In Facebook > http://www.facebook.com/groups/osdcmalaysia/ > > Malaysia Open Source Conference 2012 > MOSC2012 http://portal.mosc.my/ > -- To unsubscribe from and detail about this group http://portal.mosc.my/osdc-my-mailing-list-information OSDC.my Discussion Group In Facebook http://www.facebook.com/groups/osdcmalaysia/ Malaysia Open Source Conference 2012 MOSC2012 http://portal.mosc.my/
