Slashdot Mirror
New York City Examines Law Mandating Open Source
An anonymous submitter writes "The New York Council held a hearing on the 'SOFTWARE WARS.' The Select Committee on Technology in Government, chaired by Council Member Gale A. Brewer (D-Manhattan), held a public hearing Tuesday on software procurement practices by state and local governments. Representatives from the City's Department of Information Technology and Telecommunications, Microsoft, as well as numerous local software companies testified. Newsforge is carrying the testimony at the hearing of Tony Stanco, Director of The Center of Open Source & Government." Newsforge and Slashdot are both part of OSDN.
The title of this post seems to imply that the decision to use open source should be mandatory. This is as harmful to the world of open source as it is helpful. Remember guys, it's all about decision - and the ability to use the best tool for the job. I've got a Windows workstation, a Linux server, and a Mac laptop on my desk. I feel that each OS is best suited to that particular role, and I use them accordingly.
The article states in regards to lobbying against OSS: " This is a very subtle silencing of Open Source. It is supremely disingenuous, and violates the fundamental principle of a free market: fully informed decision-making. Why shouldn't procurement officers be asked to consider Open Source software?
Fully informed decision making is far from mandatory policies.
Use whatever is going to be the most suitable. It's as easy as that.
catch (HumourFailureException e) { e.user.send("You, sir, are a humourless idiot."); }
Representatives from the City's Department of Information Technology and Telecommunications, Microsoft, as well as numerous local software companies testified.
;)
I assume that was meant to read 'Representatives from the City's Department of Information Technology and Telecommunications AND Microsoft, as well as numerous local software companies testified.'?
Not that we didn't already suspect there was evil at work in government...
It's a [______] thing...you wouldn't understand.
I hope this story hits the mainstream news wires soon. As a volunteer firefighter 10 minutes from the City line, it's depressing and disturbing to hear that the City's funds are so mismanaged that eight FDNY firehouses have to be closed. Maybe the UFA (the firefighters' union) should pick up on this story and run some numbers past the mayor and the council.
Go Tony!
Unix: Where
Why wouldn't it be a War? It's fairly evident that corporate america's view of competition is war. Particularly when they try and use tactics like forcing government places (i.e. schools) to use things like Windows over cheaper and more secure alternatives.
- tristan
As it turns out the most telling aspect of George Orwell's 1984 was not the presence of Big Brother but the need for perpetual war to keep the masses in a continuous state of political apathy.
Seeing how the city is almost broke and getting no support from Albany.(I live in NYC) And thinking about raising taxes or levies as they call it. I guess purchasing expensive MS products is out of the question. So I guess opensource would be the logical choice.
NYC is staring a $10 BILLION deficit this year alone and this is all they can talk about?
What a waste of everyone's time and taxpayer money. Maybe they should do something more productive, like taking classes on accounting and business management so they can solve the REAL problems facing the city.
This shouldn't even be an issue for a government.
Whatever way you look at this you have to heopt he the NY council will get the right tool for the right job. If you have a system that is old,closed source but works for months on end then why should you change it?
Also if you think about the machines on workers desktops should they all be switch to Linux as its free? I personally would say no as you will soon lose more with a drop in productivity as people have to learn something new.
Just my $0.02
Rus
Cheap UK and US VPS
I happen to work for NYC government, and this post makes me want to cry.
Something people need to understand - city/federal government isn't anything similar to amazon or google. They can save money using open source - but we're the government - we're not running a search engine here, or selling books on the web. Most of what any city government IT department does is desktop support for people who use computers to do their jobs, usually entering some kind of information into one database or another.
Something else to keep in mind - we're not exactly paying the big bucks on salary either, especially for NYC. The kind of people who use these computers are very frequently people on a welfare assistance program that requires you to work to get your welfare check. Most of the time, these are some pretty great people, but they didn't exactly grow up with a computer in the house... ease of use is a big issue, and I think that it's still safe to say that crown belongs to Microsoft.
The only other big thing is communication. E-mail and the like. We use Groupwise in my agency, which is much lower cost than exchange, since Novell cuts us some pretty good deals on state contract. But we need to communicate to other people - the central IT agency for the city currently mandates that we maintain an exchange gateway, since there is no anti-virus product I can find that can scan attachments in groupwise. Even if that wasn't an issue, these are fairly important political figures, and so they demand blackberries - Mayor Bloomberg is *huge* on these things, and insists that people have them, and be able to respond to any e-mail within 10 minutes. If you can tell me how to get the BES (Blackberry Enterprise Server) running on Linux, I'll give you a great big cookie. There's countless things like this.
And back to those databases? Honestly, many of them still pop open a DOS window, for crying out loud. Even more require a *terminal emulator* to connect to an IBM mainframe. I think it's safe to say that we've been keeping the software budget on the cheap. Our standard workstation runs Windows 98, with Office 97. And keep in mind, they *come with the PC's*... so we're not exactly hosing money around here.
Sorry. A little bitterness slipped through there. =)
I'll sum up. Open source is good, and we use it when we can. We have a few Linux servers in production, and have used it for DNS, DHCP, Jabber, and firewalling. But mandating open source is just a *bad* thing.
Governments should not mandate the use of a specific tool, but should mandate that the documents and files created are stored in an open (fully documented and non-proprietary) form so that legacy data cannot be held hostage and can be accessed by citizens regardless of their software preferences.
/. If the government wants us to respect the law, it should set a better example.
Having a law mandating use of Open Source is a bad one. So you mean I as a customer of the services of the state have to suffer through using a piece of crappy software because they are not allowed to use the best product because it's not open source?
:)
Open source is a good thing, but making me use it just because is idiotic. If they want to make a law, it should say that Open Source has to be considered. Maybe make it mandatory that if there's a open source option available, it has to be included in the bid process? I don't know. How are you going to do that when your just using Debian? This is the only thing I could see that "may" be a problem. Now Red Hat or some other distro could be a part of a system, but there has to be some organization that bids out the project. A systems integrator if you will that will assist in setting up and configging the servers could put a bid on it. Then afterwards, the IT staff working for the State could gradually take it over. Personally, I don't think you have to mandate or even say it must be a consideration in the bid process because I bet that some systems in state and federal level already use it. Open source kind of just finds it's way in. One example is we already use OpenSSH on our AIX systems for system administration. Same thing goes with Mozilla. Open Source puts the software in the hands of anyone who wants it and it will be used alot because it takes no time or money to get and can be run on almost any box you already have. I bet you that state and federal IT workers probably look first to Open Source because they can usually get it approved and setup in less time than a closed source product. Approval day and setup day could virtually be the same! No waiting for media to get to ya!
Gorkman
Exactly how are you planning to use military toys in the software wars?
How small a thought it takes to fill a whole life
NYC's Contract with Microsoft must be about to expire.
"Hey Bill, give us a 90% discount or we're going Open Source!"
if you intend to discuss real #'s/facts with the wall street of deceit felons upon the pacific crest annex of capitollist hill. there's rumours that the hole bullshipping industrIE is dissolving into coolapps, butt they (the bloomingtons et AL) maintain (buy use of whoreabull ?pr? spewage) that the smoke coming out of their .asps, will NOT ignite.
lookout bullow.
The title to the /. article looks like it's wrong.
Having actually RTFA, it sounds like they're not advotacting mandating open source - they're trying to *prevent* mandating *commercial software*. It sounds like MS has been lobbying that allowing open souce software would unfairly impact them, and this is people trying to fight it down.
They don't want to mandate open source software, they want to mandate *consideration* of open source software.
Reports would have to have a line in them saying '...we didn't use open source software because...'
Everyone who has posted saying 'mandating open source software is bad', or 'open source software is about choice' should get a clue.
I thought we had already discussed this with the bill in Oregon. To me the best comment out of the whole discussion is the one about making open standards mandatory rather than oss. Looks like politicians do not read /. !!
What I found to be most appealing about that book, was the sex.
I mean, they were procreating without permission. Gotta love that. Made me feel like I was thirteen again.
How small a thought it takes to fill a whole life
I keep wondering why they weren't considering open-source in the first place. After all, if big companies like IBM are using open-source software now, you'd think the IT staff at a large organization like a state or large city government wouldn't be in the dark about open source. If students can do it, shouldn't IT pros?
The problem seems to be that too many politicians and civil servants are incompetent and poorly qualified and if they're not presently capable of making a well-informed decision without legislation, then they're not going to make a good decision with legislation. Forcing them to consider open-source is going to confuse these morons. They'll want to call "open-source" in to make a powerpoint presentation, and will become quite confused when they can't find a number in the phone book.
To use open-source software, you need a qualified IT staff, and if you have a qualified IT staff, you're probably already considering (not necessarily using, but at least considering) open-source.
I think some firings. some better hiring practices, and perhaps requiring more basic computer knowledge of bureaucrats in general would go a lot farther than any of this legislation will. I do believe that open-source has general advantages for government, so I think a general pro-open position is a good idea, I just think that until we see some other changes, it's not going to do much.
I'm from Toronto. I'm not sure how many of you saw our mayor interviewed on TV the other day about SARS. If you did, you'll understand why I think the people running our cities are morons. Our city staff managed to blow insane amounts of money on computer services that we never even received. These people don't know shit about computers. They just know that their brother-in-law or their golf partner or whoever owns a computer consulting company, so they give him a massive contract and then they never think about computers again until they get busted by the auditor.
NYC is staring a $10 BILLION deficit this year
Then print more money.
Is OSDN a cause for concern? Read this journal entry and see what you think.
Because OSS is evil, and communist. And the fact that a lot of OSS development is done by furiners in other countries makes it easier to justify a cruise missile or two launched in their general directions.
MOST of thse closed firehouses are in northern Brooklyn in East Williamsburg, Bushwick, Bed-Sty, etc... These firehouses date from when these were the most popular neighborhoods in Brooklyn (1880-1920). When many were built, southern areas like Bensonhurst still had farms. Today, this part of Brooklyn is among the worst ghetto in the city and the population is far less than it once was. Even though the population density of Bensonhurst, Bay Ridge, and the southern neighborhoods have grown tenfold, they have not received further fire coverage.
These neighorhoods will have fire coverage in line with the city average.
I believe one firehouse is being closed downtown, a relic from when more people lived there. It could be argued that trend is reversing (I mean, look at the price for an apartment on the Lower East Side, a total ghetto just 10 years ago)... But most of those firehouses just don't need to be there.
I don't read or respond to AC posts
To me, software is a tool and currently the state of affairs is much like going to work and not being able to use a free tool because the boss only wants Craftsman or Snap-on. In the real world, this legislation would be similar to saying "before paying money to someone for something, first see if it is available for free".
When put that way it seems like the legislation would be needless, but the problem is that software companies have 2 marketing/sales folks for every one developer. Most open source projects have zero marketing guys, and the only projects who have any would be corporate folks in a mixed model like redhat or mysql.
In summary (while typing on my windows98 machine) I think this sort of direction is important from the government. The most important thing about this is that the data be stored in a non-proprietary, open format that is well documented. I don't want to have to pay for (via taxes) a copy of microsoft exchange so that I can communicate with my legislative body via email when there are 20+ FREE products that can do the same thing for much less money.
Now we should get about 20 Microsoft ROI monkeys who will try and explain how microsoft product X is cheaper than product Y. Give it up, we all know that ROI stands for Really Optimistic Ignorance! L8R
that many connect to a mainframe. Admittedly, it's been a while since I've worked with mainframes, but if you're connecting to a database (I'm thinking DB2 in particular), there's probably a big fat client app that only runs on Windows.
Well, if it's open source you could spend the money you don't pay on licences employing someone to make the software more useful to you.
If the cost of all M$ licences throught the US government, schools &co was spent on employing people to help write OSS then Microsoft would be in deep shit.
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
I suspect large bribes*cough*grants will be paid and the whole issue will be quietly dropped.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
Of course, it goes without saying that free choice is only possible when there is a genuine possibility of learning beforehand all the characteristics (good or bad) of any given product.
However, when it comes to software, it seems that the bourgeois involved in making closed-source software are going to extreme lengths to prevent a fair and free discussion of their products, for example by prohibiting "unauthorized" reviews of their products.
So, it is only fair to say that the closed-source software industry has a less than stellar record towards insuring the free-flow of information that's vitally necessary to a free-market (and this is doubly ironic in the light that this industry is involved in the movement of information).
The purpose of the State and of the Government are to insure a level playing field in all sectors of society, and it does so by curbing abuses by certain sectors of the society. Mandating the evaluation of open-source software as opposed to closed-source is one example of such action.
So, whenever a pro-open-source initiative is proposed, it is merely a sign of the Government/State doing it's proper job, as it should.
I think that companies and administration need to take care on the perpetuity of the information they store and use. Backup is important but what append if you cannot read the data from you backup? And what is happening if the application says 'bad registration key'. Please call our commercial departement...' and the software company no more exist?
If you're using Open Source software you can finfd solution because you can fix the problem by yourself (or pay somebody). But if you are using propietary software you can't an may not fix the problem.
It's why I think that if you use proprietary software you need to impose that they use standardized data format so you can change from software provider and keeping you data.
"Use cases are fairy tales..." I. S. 2005
I'd agree with you, but job security for Union Members trumps fire safety. The fire houses shouldn't be closed. More Unionised firehouses should be opened if necessary, but the Union must HOld Strong.
I have to add my concern here. I am all for open source software, products, services, etc. I use linux at work. I have used linux of several years now. I have watched it mature into a robust server OS, and a bloated workstation OS. I enjoy working with it, and other than the GUI being slow with all but a few WMs, I enjoy it. This includes kernel rebuilds, driver hunts, rpm nightmares and the like.
That said, I am not sure how I feel about mandating OSS. Why? Because this economy is horrible right now. If you are in IT, and have a job, don't think of quitting anytime soon, if you want to stay in IT. Jobs are cut all over, and workloads are heaped on those that do have jobs. But IT isn't the only sector hit. I am speaking of NYC looking to lay off 1000s of people soon. If they 'mandate' OSS, then they can use that same purchasing principal to hiring people to work on those systems- at very low wages (hell, maybe even internships). Doesn't make sense, right? Well, it appears that in the business world, if they purchase a very expensive system, companies think they need high end good IT people to work on them. Our industry benefits from this by getting just wages. But if the system is dirt cheap or free, then they look at that and think 'well, we cut costs in IT here, let's keep our costs low and bring in a qualified person at a lower wage'. They hire at a lower wage. And, they are less likely to try to use IT to help the business make money. No incentive. IT becomes the money pit businesses claim it is.
Now, this isn't typical in all businesses, mostly in large businesses and governments. Small to medium businesses usually understand (even if they aren't too thrilled about it) the costs required to upkeep systems, and are more open minded to getting low cost solutions and hiring IT people at decent (not great) wages.
They aren't talking about requiring open source usage -- yes, that would be foolish.
The argument is about requiring that applicable OSS solutions are considered before the final decision is made. In many cases, the costs to convert everone over to OpenOffice from Office97 would cost more than it was worth... but they have to at least add up the numbers.
This would clearly NOT result in big changes immediately, partly just because a lot of govt employees just use the windows software that comes with their computers, but over time this would help to counteract the marketing engine of proprietary software.
The article does have a lot of good reasons why using closed-source software can be harmful to some parts of govt.
Personally, though, I'm still kind of jumpy because we're only seeing one side of the argument here. Where can we see other testimony? It's like watching a debate on TV and turning down the volume when the candidate you don't like speaks!
--
You should doubt everything (wait, should you?)
There are only 10 types of people: those who understand decimal, those who don't, and, uh, 8 other types I forget.
Is that 10 minutes by walk, car, subway or by fire truck with sirens at full blast????
:)
Well, the subways don't stretch out here outside the five boroughs. It's ten minutes by car -- eight if I'm driving -- and about five minutes by screaming fire engine -- three if I'm driving.
Unix: Where
Bloomberg has been creatively attacking the budget problems that the city is facing (for example integrating parts of the Correction Department and Probation Department and licensing out the city's logo). Since he comes from a technology and business background, it will be interesting to see if he can be the "solutions provider" we hired him to be (minus the MS certification).
If they want to make a law, it should say that Open Source has to be considered.
Congratulations! You guessed it; that's what this law would do. No, it would not *require* open source; that would be ridiculous.
for those of you unfamiliar with NYC government(especially the city council), it's a labyrinth of stupidity, plutocracy and cronyism.
You seem to throw around the word mandate as if that is what this article is about. It's not. Change mandate to consider and your post holds no weight.
But most of those firehouses just don't need to be there.
First, that's simply not true. Fire houses, at least in NYC, tend to be spaced in such a way that minimizes response time for the whole city, not just one neighborhood, regardless of population density or income level. Traffic is still traffic. Also, if the rig in your local firehouse is out on a job, and you report a fire in your house, the engine that reports comes from the next-nearest firehouse, and the entire battalion, and eventually the entire borough, fans out to fill the gaps. Fewer fire houses farther apart breaks the whole system down, and can, in theory, lead to higher response times borough-wide.
But besides all that, you're missing my point. This is a way to save the city a few bucks. What's better -- closed firehouses and slot machines in the city (another wonderful Bloomberg idea), or open firehouses and open source?
Unix: Where
This thread should be titled "New York City Examines Law Mandating Linux". Why does Linux continually hide under the guise of open source? If Windows was open source this article would take on a somewhat curious tone right? I mean, we'd be confused about whose open source they suggest. Ok, so they should use open (as in readable) software, that just makes sense right? What about open source applications that run on a closed source OS? Would that be ok? If not, should the entire hardware platform be open too? You need open source hardware spec too? Since Linux -is- the only open source platform, there's no reason to minc words. Say what you mean.
+2 cents.
Democratic Implications: I don't know if I would phrase it as "democratic implications", but his point about having data formats be open is excellent. The second argument about transparency in voting software is a bit of a stretch. People already use proprietary software for all kinds of important government functions, and the republic still stands. Presumably if someone really pressured a company to have their e-voting source code examined by an independent person, they could allow it without going full "open source".
Privacy: This might be a good buzzword, but a bad argument. Why can't open source software transmit or leak privacy data? The vague monopoly reference I suppose will play well in a state that was one of the parties to the DOJ Microsoft lawsuit.
Cost: I think it is best not to focus on cost. First of all because the price of software is such a small part and there are more support options for some proprietary software. But mostly because institutions already consider cost when making buying decisions.
R&D/Technology Transfer: Doubtful. Telling a government to buy such-and-such because of a "general good to society/it's the right thing to do" argument is not going to fly in a time of budget crunch.
Education: Not a bad argument, but still not something governments can probably afford to worry about right now. Perhaps you could argue that the programmers working for the city/state itself could benefit from seeing the source.
Job Creation: NO NO NO. Don't say this. It will not work to argue that the open source industry, with its share prices around $1, is a better way to create jobs then the closed source one with Microsoft, Oracle, etc.
Security: This is a good argument, but badly stated. 1) the "more eyeballs" theory of open source code quality is not proven 2) The quote in question relates to *banning* open source software and apparently simply refers to the fact that open source applications such as sendmail are heavily used by the DoD. I think a much better way to approach security is to talk about security of the *data* stored by open source, because it is easier to access.
So in summary -- the real argument should be for open data formats, not open source. That's the argument that Microsoft is going to have a hard time with.
- adam
Ghetto areas have the most fires. Today few houses in good neighborhoods go up in flames because of new saftey features.
Poor areas, areas with lots of abandoned building in particular, are vulnerable to kids and lunatics who get a thrill out of setting things on fire. When abandoned buildings go up, they have a tendency to spread quickly and create problems.
In middle class areas, 70% of firemen's duties are acting as first responders and paramedics for anything from car accidents to gas leaks and medical emergencies. the other 30% is divided between code inspections and fires.
I'd be hesitant to close firehouses in a city the size of new york, particularly when you consider the size and waste of other city agencies...
Conformity is the jailer of freedom and enemy of growth. -JFK
But it seems to me that whatever Mike & co. can do to reduce the deficit would be a good idea.
This is like saying "don't bother putting out that grease fire in the kitchen, the house down the street is going up." when you have about 20 people ready to put them out.
We can do more than one thing at once, kids.
+++ATH0
Or is using MS product more important than than public services now?
Software wars map...
The previous ones were available through this link.
Trolling using another account since 2005.
By mandating all data be stored in open, non-proprietary, non-patent encumbered formats, we'll be free of vendor lock in and competition can once again return to the software industry. I thought SGML used to be a federal government requirement for all data, what happened to that? Mandating that government "consider" FOSS software is a good use of tax payers dollars!
The author writes very clearly, but focuses on the issues important to the Open Source community, not on the issues important to the audience.
Democratic implications? It's a wonderful ideal, an I support it and I'm sure some of the audience does, but if that's one of the first arguments you offer, you look pretty weak. Maybe I'm misjudging the audience.
Educate the next generation of IT professionals? That's wonderful, but is the user base geeks-in-training or city workers? Even in schools, most students -- believe it not -- aren't studying comp. sci. Heck, I'm an IT professional, and the hassles of Linux aren't worth it for my desktop either.
Privacy? Few people have the obsession with it that is found (rightfully, I think) on Slashdot.
Their concern is price and performance. Focus on the markets where OSS can kill.
* Provide software to all city employees that perform one task, for free
* Sure, some managers need Excel, and someone writing a manual might want something proprietary, but you can provide software to all those employees writing letters and memos for free
* Back end basic infrustructure -- You only need proprietary software in specialized cases. E-mail is a commodity.
etc. I don't know much about the needs of city gov't, so I'm only guessing above. But I doubt their interests align so neatly with the open source community. The point of marketing and sales is to learn your customers needs and address them. OSS serves the developers, not the customers, but don't be surprised when the customers aren't interested.
...job security for Union Members trumps fire safety...
No, job security for UFA members is fire safety. More firefighters on duty means quicker response time. Quicker response time means more lives saved.
This isn't quantum physics. You cook a turkey at 350 degrees (Fahrenheit). Your average house fire cooks somewhere around 1200 degrees. The quicker the FD gets to that fire and gets people out, the greater the chance of survival for the occupants. The farther the firefighters have to travel to get to the fire scene -- especially in NYC traffic -- the lower the occupants' chance of survival.
As a side note, IIRC, the city has already closed the Bronx borough fire inspector's office. This means more arsons will go undetected, because lots of evidence can be destroyed in the 20 minutes it'll take for an inspector from Manhattan to trek up there. That means higher home insurance rates for everyone, not just NYC or even NYS residents.
Unix: Where
War is Peace
Source is Closed
Microsoft is Security
I had someone send me a schedule in MS Word format.
I opened it and looked at it on KWord.
After some disagreement about what it said, I took it to MS Word, and sure enough, the document was completely different. I think I was seeing something that had been deleted and replaced, actually.
Likewise, equations, pictures, tables, all do not translate successfully, regularly. Shoot, MS Word can't even read old MS Word files, and sometimes can't read new MS Word files, you would think that they have the full source code available within their company, anyhow.
If I were directing a government, I would INSIST that no public document be kept in MS Word format. MS Word format is not stable, and documents are not even safe if you buy the licensed software.
[P.S. : I have had the same trouble with AbiWord and OpenOffice -- but I uninstalled those on my system, because they are slower than KWord.]
Correct Horse Battery Staple: 72 bits of entropy. Enter "Correct H" into google. When it generates the phrase, that's
Remember guys, it's all about decision - and the ability to use the best tool for the job.
And the job is to ensure that government data remains available and accessible to the government and its citizens regardless of the whims or fortunes of private enterprise.
As engineers, it is easy to forget that there is more to a "job" than just the specific operations you want the computer to perform. There's the licensing terms -- are you allowed to do what you need? Maintainability, support, cost, etc etc. A government also has a responsibility to the public, adding even more constraints to the job.
Think of it this way: You wouldn't buy a house that couldn't be repaired if the company that built it went out of business, would you? Yet the house could otherwise be perfectly suitable.
I've got a Windows workstation, a Linux server, and a Mac laptop on my desk.
Now, which of those systems do you think is best for providing transparent operation and permanence of data that any citizen can access? Which one is more likely to still have readable data on it in twenty years?
Fully informed decision making is far from mandatory policies.
Well, aside from it not being mandatory... If the mandatory policy was made through fully informed decision making, then no, it isn't far. Recognizing that as a government your job has certain additional requirements that only free software can meet is a decision.
Deciding to never consider buying a house that can only be repaired by its original manufacturers isn't uninformed, it is in fact fully informed -- its recognizing that you have a requirement, and no house of that kind can meet it.
The enemies of Democracy are
a good decision-making process can handle many types of decisions using the most general algorithms applicable (i.e., general enough but not too general). see the good venezualen senator's point by point description for a start.
a bad decision-making process handles few types of decisions because it is data-dependent. in this case, that means nyc public administration is trying to squeeze lobbying dollars out of the vendors (usloth) in exchange for long-term vendor lock-in.
Why is it that OSS people feel the only way they can get people to use their software is if they force it down their throats?
ease of use is a big issue, and I think that it's still safe to say that crown belongs to Microsoft.
I thought Apple had that crown, not Microsoft
Jobs will return just as soon as fuel prices go down. The US now has the second largest oil reserve in the world. Get ready now the US will try for the largest oil resrve. When we have that jobs will return for your lifetime, but not for your children. We'll not to worry you'll be dead by then, so it doesn't really matter.
Nothin Matters an What if it Did?
I have to ask... :
You say
Heck, I'm an IT professional, and the hassles of Linux aren't worth it for my desktop either.
Have you really tried to use Linux lately as your desktop? I find it QUITE useable, particularly the RedHat9 and Mandrake9 variants.
If you are worried about Windows interoperability, Office2K (and even XP, now) run under Crossover Office, so you can have your MS docs and spreadsheets, as well as Access databases. The cost is minimal (well, compared to the actual MS license costs) - 65 bucks.
If you're not so worried about MS doc formats, there are a couple of very useable office suites out there for Linux.
I run Linux as my primary desktop and have no trouble operating on a primarily MS network.
The important thing is not OSS, but open source data files. Mandate that all software companies must disclose 100% of their data file spec. That way, everyone can read and write to, for example, the Word format--and everyone is free to choose the best tool to do so.
No company will ever go for being required to change their software to support a standard format. Meaning if an attempt is made to legislate that, they will scream long and loud. Just make Microsoft release their internal Office document format, which they obviously must have lying around somewhere.
- adam
Most procurement systems are biased against open-source software. They are designed specifically to cater to commercial entities. For instance, many bids that go out are mandated by policy to include certain types of software, often name-specific.
Also, by the very fact they go out to bid indicates money must be spent. Software is not represented by a commercial entity is at a disadvantage.
The problem with a monopoly is that it warps the market space-time around it, like a black hole. Decisions are made not by "value propositions," but by control of the distribution points. History (and internal memos released during the anti-trust trial) shows that Microsoft is a master manipulator: of public opinion, of the stock market (if you discount the money they print as stock options, MS is not very profitable at all), and especially of the distribution chain.
The recent spate of proposed local- and state-level legislation merely provides an alternative to commercial-only procurements. There is no "forcing down their throats."
Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
I'm the IT manager for a medium size (~ 200K pop), city govt in Texas near the D/FW metroplex and we're specifically developing a migrate-to-Linux plan to present to our MS reps in the hopes of getting substantial discounts on making the jump city-wide from our old NT4 to W2K3. If MS doesn't curb their greed with us on this deal to a substantial degree, however, we *will* migrate to Linux at least on the server side, and we are prepared to commit to the additional administrative overhead of managing Linux as a NOS... and don't kid yourself about it being harder to admin, because MS stuff is orders of magnitude more convenient and easier to operate on a day-to-day basis.
Posting A/C, naturally.
This issue most definitely has its debatable points and should be thought about carefully... but that's what they're doing. And ya know what, the people considering this decision would be plain stupid not to even consider it. It may well make enormous financial sense to go open source. True, there might be various economic dislocations along the way, and retraining will be necessary if they go with open source... but the alternative is to remain beholden to microsoft, who will continue to ratchet up the price and invade privacy until the government will be either bankrupt or a puppet of MS.
And by the way, the KDE desktop hardly sucks these days. It's already very nice, and its rate of improvement absolutely blows away that of Windows.
If you just need to whip out your hanky, how about crying about the hijacking of America by corporations, or Hilary Rosen authoring IP/DRM laws for Afghanistan... something other than NY considering the adoption of open source, an issue that actually has merit and whose decision makers at least have their hearts in the right place.
One place where the concept of open source shines is when you need to make new software. If my tax money is going to be spent on creating new software (eg. a new electronic voting system), I want that software to be made free and open source so that other communities can benefit from the software too - and so that we don't have to pay large license fees if we decide to install the software on more machines. I don't want to pay some proprietary vendor the cost of development, only to let them resell the same package again.
I haven't yet read the text of for the proposed NY city law, but if it's anything like the current House bill pending in Oregon, I say beware. The Oregon bill is not about getting the government to also consider OSS, it's about getting any rid of any sort of dealings the government might have with private business. A simple reading of the bill reveals that any person that decides to use proprietary software versus open source must, in writing, justify their choice. Choose to use Microsoft Office over OpenOffice? Better be prepared to defend yourself. Want to use MySQL over Oracle's? Feel free, no one's going to bother you. Doesn't matter that the entire existing infrastructure is already based around proprietary systems. As an OSS developer, I applaud the governments desire to use OSS. An informed decider will choose the best software, whether its OSS or not. But this bill amounts to nothing less than duress.
First off, this law is not about mandating OSS, it's about mandating procurement offices to consider OSS as an option. In other words, since taxpayer dollars are on the line, the government should do its best to reduce costs. If cost-benefit analysis shows that OSS can achieve this goal, it should always be used instead of proprietary software.
I propose to take this a step further. If a government IT group can develop or extend OSS cheaper than it can obtain proprietary software to meet the same need, it should be required to take this route as well. Geeks listen up: this is yet another way to be paid to write free software. Offer software consulting and development services to your local government. Bid against the crufty proprietary folks!
They also try to switch to an all or nothing licensing scheme. That is either ABC-City agrees to pay Microsost $X per head which gives them rights to:
...
-- any version of windows
-- office
-- server products
or
they have to pay retail for everything with no discounts. Force cities to do transitions in the most painful way possible. That way transitioning doesn't pay until you hit something like the 70% mark which might take 5 years....
... or else I would have realized I was replying to an AC and, well, wouldn't have bothered...
Trouble making decisions? Just flip for it.
Job Creation: NO NO NO. Don't say this. It will not work to argue that the open source industry, with its share prices around $1, is a better way to create jobs then the closed source one with Microsoft, Oracle, etc.
You are missing the point. Oracle jobs are in CA, Microsoft jobs are in WA. Implementing, configuring, maintaining... open source jobs are in NYC.
Sorry, not trying to troll or insult, but I hate hearing this argument. It always drives me nuts that our society is more interested in creating jobs that making real wealth. After all, software in the context your talking about is just a tool. It's a means to an end (supplying city services in this case), not an end in itself. If society could have that tool for virtually no cost, it could put those resources spent on the tool to better use. It's as though I could give every carpenter in New York a free hammer, nails, and wood. That would put the supplier out of business, but on the other hand it would free that supplier up to do other things for society, like make more buildings.
I'm being an idealist though. A better society would dedicate the resouces saved to it's citizens as a whole. Ours will just make a few assholes richer, and maybe ship a few more jobs over to india. Your point is more realistic, I just really hate the fact that that's the way things are.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
I can only say that it would go up like a lead balloon. The agency I worked for was entirely head-in-its-butt backward when it came to its IT Procurement.
It used '96 era Machines (pentium 75's with 96 mb RAM, as servers) and new IBM's for desktops. Fer crissakes They were using NT 4.0, Developing in VB6, JSP and Oracle for their internal apps. (and this was in 2002).
On the server side, They might have issues with their home-built apps. On the Desktop side.... Bwahaha.... I have never seen such a bunch of computer idiots. Many of these sity workers are seeing computers for the first time and the concept of turning the computer on seems to baffle them.
Don't get me started....
"the difference between myself and a madman is that I am not mad" -Salvadore Dali
Actually Sun conducted these studies where people had to buy:
-- expensive sun servers
-- replace apps
It came out mildly favorable. However you ended up with vastly better communication and real offices were able to go fully paperless. That meant you didn't need individual desks and that allowed for real estate reductions of about 40% of all real estate (which I imagine in NYC would be worth unbelievable amounts of money).
Now even if you don't want to go paperless replace the expensive sun boxes with cheap dells and you end up saving a ton.
Its probably in the same rulebook that all government software needs to be written in ada.
Mandatory consideration of OSS is a good thing. Like the article pointed out, OSS doesn't have an army of lobbyists or a huge sales department pushing its products. This may be the only way to counter-balance the pressure put on the government by billion dollar corporations.
Mandatory consideration of OSS does not mean that the Government will drop proprietary software and jump on the OSS train. Unfortunately, once you are locked into a proprietary solution it can be very expensive to dump your existing software. In my agency we are very entrenched in Microsoft products. We have hundreds of Word macros that pull in data from our Microsoft SQL server. We also have other database applications that run against the SQL server. It would be a major project that would require several years to move away from Microsoft.
Further, there is no incentive to take the risk. No one is going to get fired by suggesting that we stay with Microsoft but if there were a push to OSS that didn't go well then heads would roll.
I use Linux at home and believe very strongly in OSS but I was almost crucified when I suggested it several years ago.
The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!
Lemme guess: you're italian, no?
Paren't whole point is moot. Mod parent (-1, wrong /RTFA)
Mode parent (-1, wrong/RTFA)
I don't think either OSS or open formats should be mandated. They should be considered, and perhaps non-open format options should need explicit justification inpurchase decissions. Forcing people to be informed seldom hurts. Legislators micro-managing purchase decissions across the board is a bad precident to start.
Open file formats are also much less cut-and-dry than open source. You can wrap a word document in XML and call it an open file format, or even break up the data structures and put them in XML tags but leave them incomprehensible. "Open format" is not well defined.
The parent's poster failed to read either article he mentioned in his post. Parent is just plain wrong. Parent should go directly to jail, not passing go, not collecting $200.
Copyright Violation:"theft, piracy"::Anti-Trust Violation:"thermonuclear price terrorism"<-Overly dramatic language.
Format:
:Word Document Ends
Header
Data
Footer
Word Document Begins:
blahasciigarbageblahrepeat600x
Now do you see? Documented and comprehensible aren't equivalent.
shutuppayouface!!
(mods : +1 funny thx)
One really good (if a bit simple) format that is open is HTML/CSS, this lets you have tables fonts pics what ever. But it does tend to be a bit bloated if there is large amounts of it so maybe we ZIP it or use an open compression format?
First, that's simply not true. Fire houses, at least in NYC, tend to be spaced in such a way that minimizes response time for the whole city, not just one neighborhood, regardless of population density or income level.
Pray tell then, great specialist in urban planning, if such planning was so centralized, how is it half those fire houses were constructed before Brooklyn even merged with New York City? Did New York and Brooklyn secretly plan their fire coverage in the 1880's to provide the perfect coverage 130 years later? Do you realize many of these firehouses date from an age before combustion engines??
Have you been to Bushwick lately? The number of condemnded buildins and empty lots is startling. How could you possibly need the same fire coverage in a neighborhood that has 25% buildings than it once did.
I hate to tell you but you are quite misinformed about these particular firehouses. Each one of them has another firehouse in perfect working order just a few hundred meters away, and response time to the surrounding community will be increased by a minute or two.
Oh, and population density is very much a factor in determine where to place firehouses. Why don't you waste your time and tell us how many are in the industrial portions of the south Bronx.
But besides all that, you're missing my point. This is a way to save the city a few bucks. What's better -- closed firehouses and slot machines in the city (another wonderful Bloomberg idea), or open firehouses and open source?
How about we trim all redundant services, including redundant firehouses, open casinos on Far Rockaway so something can go on there besides housing projects, AND we have open source to save money on software licenses?
What could you possibly have against casinos? I think its a great idea. Plus, Bloomberg will have a hard time maintaining the smoking ban then...
I don't read or respond to AC posts