| CRBJ Charter Member: |
|
|
| CRBJ Home > June 2005 | |||||
Open-source packages are a viable alternative to proprietary softwareBy Ken DoyleThe Open-Source Business Conference, held in April, featured an impressive list of companies as its sponsors, headed by Microsoft. This move was the latest evidence of Microsoft's strategy, announced last year, to target its open-source competition. Another part of that strategy was revealed in the results of a Microsoft-sponsored study (www.veritest.com/clients/reports/microsoft), showing that Windows Server 2003 was more reliable than Red Hat Enterprise Linux. While the results of the study are open to interpretation, it's clear that Microsoft is taking the open-source challenge seriously.
If you're in the growing contingent of companies dissatisfied with proprietary software, you've probably considered open-source solutions. The decision is complex and varies greatly depending on company size, age and information technology infrastructure. Here are some of the main factors that will guide the decision-making process. Cost: A common misconception is that open-source translates to "free." It's true that the initial cost of open-source packages is less than that of their proprietary counterparts, but the total cost of ownership (TCO) is important. According to research by the Yankee Group (www.yankeegroup.com), there is almost no difference in the costs of maintaining a Microsoft-based corporate server compared to a Linux-based one. However, companies that have invested heavily in IT staff with a slew of Microsoft certifications may incur considerable costs in retraining existing employees or hiring new ones. Support: The major perceived benefit of buying proprietary software is that you always have access to technical support when something goes wrong. Still, with per-call fees and time spent on hold, costs can add up quickly. Open-source software is, by definition, developed and supported by a large community, and helpful resources are generally available at no cost. You're also more likely to get quick access to patches and upgrades compared to software supported by a single vendor. The downside to this approach is that you may get several different answers to the same question, depending on where you look. Performance: Microsoft's studies notwithstanding, real-world experience has shown that open-source operating systems and server applications tend to perform as well as or better than their proprietary counterparts. Open-source solutions are particularly impressive on older hardware, which may not even be capable of running Windows XP. And open-source solutions dominate the world of Web server hosting, with the Linux-Apache-mySQL-PHP (LAMP) combination reaching just under 70 percent market share in April (news.netcraft.com). Usability: Linux has a reputation for being a "geeky" operating system, one that's not ready for the average user's desktop. That may have been so even a year ago, but a lot has changed. Today, major companies such as Ameritrade, Burlington Coat Factory and Toyota USA ? as well as governments of several countries, including China ? are using Linux for a majority of their applications. In many ways, the question of using open-source solutions has as much to do with corporate attitudes as it does with technology. Embracing a collaborative, global software culture can be a much greater challenge than deploying the software itself. techtalk@loquent.net madison.com ©2009 Capital Newspapers. All rights reserved. |
|
||||