Open source / free software vs proprietary software

1
Open source / free software vs proprietary
software what is best for business?

• Kaido KikkasTallinn University Estonian IT
  SocietyPaving for eFutureReykjavik, September
  13, 2007

The distribution of this document is governed by
the GNU Free Documentation License version 1.2 or
later. See the license at http//www.fsf.org/licen
sing/licenses/fdl.html
2
For those unfamiliar with the free world...

• ... these terms and concepts are worth studying
• free software
• open source
• GNU General Public License
• copyleft
• hacker
• hacker ethic
• Linus' Law on work motivationNB! Due to the
  presentation's small timeframe, additional
  arguments, data and links are provided by the
  complementary webpage (including these slides)
  athttp//www.kakupesa.net/kakk/docs/reykjavik200
  7/

3
Looking at the title...

• I'd like to ask about a small detailBest for
  WHOSE business...?
• I try to keep the user's (as opposed to vendor's)
  perspective
• Plus, in the next slides I try to look at a
  business considering a shift from proprietary to
  free model and give some arguments to support
  the decision

4
What would a business expect from its IT?

• doing the necessary thing
• reasonable acquiring costs (esp. SME)
• reasonable running costs
• reasonable (re)training costs
• reliability
• interoperability
• security
• support
• flexibility, extensibility and scalability
• choice of services and providers (no lock-in)?

5
1. doing the necessary thing

• All software regardless of licensing model can be
  appropriate. Or not.
• A caveat when moving to software with different
  licensing model, do not assume that all your
  previous knowledge remains valid. Or to put it
  simpler Linux is NOT Windows
• Yet the added benefit of open source code allows
  for better modifications. Also, the market is
  open one can opt for in-house improvements or
  choose the best partner instead of paying
  extorting prices to a market dominator

6
2. acquiring costs

• The smaller the enterprise, the more important
  (typically) issue it is
• FOSS results in large savings in this stage
  (probably not denied even by proprietary
  vendors)?
• But even in the free world, going blindly for the
  seemingly cheapest option may not be wise
• In the business world (somewhat opposed to the
  NGO, education and private spheres) using
  commercially-backed solutions (which may cost
  quite a lot) may be justified. But not always
  an important factor is the in-house IT capacity

7
3. running costs

• Similar to the former, but has more variables in
  it
• Leaving your homework undone may sometimes hit
  quite hard
• Due to the increasingly unreasonable
  'intellectual property' system, may run into
  various artificial obstacles (patents etc) when
  not careful. In Europe, the problem is much
  smaller than in the US
• Earlier, finding qualified staff was somewhat an
  issue (not much anymore, but depends on the
  location)?

8
4. (re)training costs

• Can be substantial when moving large numbers of
  employees to a new platform
• In essence, do not depend on licensing model
• Often cited as a prohibitive factor in moving to
  free models yet the same applies to proprietary
  systems
• E.g. for a typical desktop user, moving from MS
  Office 2000 to the new 2007 is arguably more
  difficult than moving to OpenOffice.org
• Free model can result in more flexible training
  again, you do not need Authorized Trainers

9
5. reliability

• Depends also on the maintenance skills of the
  tech staff incompetent technicians can work
  wonders (in a negative sense)?
• Free systems (e.g. BSD or Linux) have excellent
  reliability marks worldwide

10
6. interoperability

• Proprietary systems tend to be interoperable as
  long as you use the products of the same company
• Sometimes interoperability is considered directly
  counterproductive to the company's goals (the
  earlier case of MS Office documents, or also the
  current OOXML debate). Conflict of interests?
• Free systems have more potential here, although
  it should not be taken for granted in some
  cases the initial author does not have need for
  it and thus will not stress it
• Open standards are the key but more than often,
  there is a strong correlation with software
  freedom

11
7. security

• A long-time plague in MS software Trojan horses
  and viruses are 99 Windows-specific (in fact, a
  Linux virus is like the Yeti some people claim
  it exists. Never seen one yet)?
• Being locked into a single platform also
  contributes towards weaker security an attack
  will only need a single vector
• A side remark regardless of platform, the
  biggest security risk is always located between
  the keyboard and the chair gt a training issue

12
8. support

• At the first glance, this one is a clear win for
  proprietary systems. Linux has no support...
• Actually, surprisingly large number of free
  systems have commercial support available.
  Moreover, the market is open (again) and thus it
  is much harder to charge excessive sums for
  support services
• Support can be obtained both in a traditional way
  (by purchasing the software e.g. Red Hat) or
  from third parties

13
9. flexibility, extensibility and scalability

• Clearly better in free systems. Examples
• Most of the Top 500 supercomputers run Linux
• Free NetBSD operating system supports more than
  50 hardware platforms
• Flexibility is an important factor in open
  source, so is extensibility. Both stem from the
  lack of either technical (lack of source code) or
  legal (prohibitive licensing) obstacles

14
10. Choice

• Monoculture is dangerous both in biology and in
  technology (some call it inbreeding)?
• Proprietary vendors often strive to create large,
  unified solutions on a single (their own)
  platform, leaving it more vulnerable to threats
• Also, having achieved a lock-in on a customer,
  the vendor is able to charge remarkably higher
  prices than in the case of open market

15
Where proprietary approach may make sense

• In highly professional, specialised fields with
  turnkey solutions handed out (e.g. composers)?
• the client can afford to pay for support
• the client's time is expensive losing access to
  his/her tools would cost much more than calling
  for a specialist
• But even here I'd consider a free approach for
  greater flexibility and playing room for support
• The more common the application, the more obvious
  should using the free model be

16
Personal opinion if I had a business

• I'd run my IT sector roughly as follows
• MS Windows only where specific applications
  demand it preferrably also locked into a
  separate network cluster prefer XP over Vista as
  long as possible using free applications on
  Windows where possible (app compatibility)?
• MacOS X is an option for presentation/sales
• The rest would run on free systems (exact methods
  support etc - depend on circumstances)?
• And I would be far from the first one doing that

17
Conclusion

• Free models have been discussed from a variety of
  viewpoints in this presentation we left aside
  ethical and social issues and focused on
  professional ones only (my personal reasons to
  avoid proprietary software are 50/50 a business
  decision and an ethical statement). But even
  these are sufficient
• Thus, my point is BE BUYERS AWARE )?

18
Thank you!

• Contact
• Kaido Kikkas
• kaido.kikkas_at_kakupesa.net
• http//www.kakupesa.net