You will find that many organisations will only stay with mainstream suppliers as this allows them the most flexibility if they fall out with a supplier or a key member of staff/contractor goes under a bus.
All businesses know they can get support of a certain level just by making a few calls for MS/Sage/IBM type products. This has been the downfall (in the UK at least) of many small proprietary systems who have in the past supplied Accounts/Payroll and some vertical component. They are being destroyed by software houses supplying Sage/MS for the accounts and then adding the vertical app on top not just on cost but also because there is no lock in. Also boards do not have the knowledge (and dont care to gain it) to be able to adequately assess OSS options. There perception of an OSS product isn't the product it is the companies that supports it. If they are few and far between then they aren't interested. Unless there are some clear advantages to an OSS project deployment (costs being the biggest) even CIO/IT directors are loath to run the risks. OSS contingency plans nearly always look worse than mainstream for this reason and when you start to look at it this way they will always head for what is safe; maybe not as cost effective and/or practical but the easiest to dig out of hole. But then I do these things as well. I could build systems cheaper than I could buy them but the cost isn't worth it against the ease of picking up a phone and ordering a replacement xyz. Most of my .Net development is built on top of OSS products (Castle) but that doesn't register with the end user because it is VS I am using to deliver the systems and there are lots of people to go to if I step in front of the half past the hour 109. Regards Michael Hawksworth > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:profoxtech- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy Davies > Sent: 25 July 2007 10:00 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [NF] Dabo ++: Open Source and Instability > > Dave, > you are, of course, absolutely right! > If I ask "but have you ever needed support, and would you know how to > get > it if you did?" I get the rabbit-in-headlights look - I've replied to > what > they were saying not what they were emoting! > > Andrew Davies MBCS CITP > - AndyD 8-(# > > > > > "Dave Crozier" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED] To: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > o.uk> cc: > Sent by: Subject: RE: [NF] Dabo > ++: Open Source and Instability > profoxtech-bounce > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > 25/07/2007 09:49 > Please respond to > profox > > > > > Andy, > Don't you think that the "warm comforting feeling" is because the > product > is > backed by a big company as opposed to "individuals" no matter how good > or > talented they are? Note that I talk of individuals in the broadest > sense of > the word not as single entities. > > The managerial mentality of thinking is usually that "big" means "safe" > as > in "nobody ever got sacked by buying IBM", which, even though we as > developers see the bigger picture seems to be indelibly stamped on the > small > brains of the PHB's. > > As you say, you have never needed support from Lotus/IBM and I guess > that > if > you HAD wanted it, it would have been charged for at a large premium > and > probably been useless anyway. We all know that the best support comes > from > other developers e.g this group for example. > > Unfortunately, my take on the situation is that even if say VFP were > made > open source, that the large institutions still wouldn't accept it as a > mainstream product without the support of a major player. > > Stupid I know and I do hope this short sighted attitude changes but I > doubt > it will. > > Dave Crozier > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf > Of Andy Davies > Sent: 25 July 2007 09:26 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [NF] Dabo ++: Open Source and Instability > > Ted Roche said: > "I don't want to hunt you down and kill you, either, but really engage > you on this idea that Open Source is more unstable. I thought that way > for a long time, until I realized that *all* software is unstable, > unless its stone-cold dead." > > I see an example of this with my current employers - we have a lot of > end-user written Lotus Approach apps which the powers that be say must > be > replaced because IBM no longer support it. > We (and I suspect 99.9% of users) have never needed support for > Approach, > but the lack of support is seen as a killer (or was until users asked > IT to > provide a replacement and support it <bg>). > Now if it were an Open Source product the ptb could have the warm > comforting feeling that in the unlikely event of us needing 'support' > the > source code was available. > > Andrew Davies MBCS CITP > - AndyD 8-)# > > > > ********************************************************************** > > Manchester City Council supports Smokefree England - 1 July 2007 > > > This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and > intended > solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are > addressed. > If you have received this email in error please notify the system > manager. > > This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by > MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses. > > Please contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] with any > queries. > > ********************************************************************** > > > [excessive quoting removed by server] _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
