Slashdot Mirror
Open Source Part of Mainstream IT in Canada
Sxip writes "A recent survey of advanced technology companies indicates that Open Source software is becoming an explicit component in enterprise Information Technology (IT) strategy and architecture. Some nine out of ten respondents include Open Source in their planning."
Great news - at least some of the larger corporations *coughtakenotebillgatescough* are using open source to its full advantage, even if it's in Canada.
HAH! I just wasted a second of your life making you read this, but I wasted a minute of mine thinking it up. DAMN.
....Rely on it. The online edition I work for has just as many Linux boxen as Windows boxen. And only 1/2 of them are serving pages. The only ones using Windows is us journalists and the suits. And we journalists could have done it with Linux as well. Although I prefer to do it (the writing, pervert! ;) with MacOS X
Good! Maybe this will be an inspiration for the non-cookoo crazy countries to do the same! This ranks up there with the news of the goverment voting software being open-source ;)
-Imidazole
Hilarious Office Prank!
The mirror of http://www.cata.ca/Media_and_Events/Press_Release
In Canada, when they say 9 out of 10, they mean 9 out of THE 10 developers.
Well, this all depends on the perspective:
Open source is an integral part of the enterprise environment these days in larger organizations, but that doesnt mean that its "linux on every desktop".
Working as a developer for a very large global consulting firm, I can say that the way open source is penetrating enterprises is by being "parts of the machinery", for example, if you are developing custom applications, it is almost unavoidable to use open source components such as Struts, Dom4j and tools like jUnit, Ant etc.
But we are still some distance from "open source dominating the environments", open source is gaining traction mostly in the areas where the developers have a big say in what is chosen. When it comes to the choice of "backbone platform", this is still very much a management choice of commercial platforms.
I know I try and use OpenSource whenever I can on all my client's projects, it works out better for everyone.
43% of respondents weren't home.
39% of respondents pretended they weren't home.
20% of respondents were unsure/undecided.
Margin of error was 2%
Unknown host pong.
I believe that's "Oupen Source"
It's cuz' we're cheap!
Okay, I know this is the typical response but it has to be said: Where the $#@ is the credibility in this piece?
There is no information on how the people being surveyed were selected and how they were surveyed. I always find it suspicious at the least and downright misleading at the worst when people do their own surveys without revealing the details of data collection. A sample size would be nice.
It doesn't have to be super-detailed for the press release but it ought to at least say "Through out Internet survey to 100 of our members" would at least give context to their results.
If it's skewed I want to know. If it's accurate, I want to know that too.
Sunny
Be my Friend
Technically, don't MOST companies include open source in their planning? I mean after the widely publicized MS discounts given after the mention of anything Open Source, you'd at least try to leverage that.
The cynic in me thinks the term "Open Source" is used more as a bargaining tool than anything that gets implemented. I'm not sure I like that idea.
Personally, I use it extensively in my business. I take all sorts of Open Source software and resell it either as a standalone product or as a service. Open Source software is, for mature projects, well designed, easy to use, and there's a community standing behind it to help out should I ever need customizations. My profits have never been higher. Before, I used to have to develop everything myself or hire other programmers to create software for my company. Now, with the exception of usual overhead and support costs, it's all profit.
I would encourage other companies to do this as well, but right now this has given me a huge competitive advantage. I can undercut all my competitors and they just can't keep up due to overhead with their development staff. While I can still make a profit selling a product for $10, they need to charge at least $100 to recoup their expenses.
Thank you, Open Source!
Closed source software is a worse form of exploitation, more akin to slavery. If you work on an Open Source project, you get to keep everything you invested in it as well as a dividend from everyone else's investment in it. If you work on a Closed Source project, some faceless corporation owns everything you put into it.
Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
Grandparent is a useless poster with nothing insightful to say.
yea, tell me about it, Americans are way yto Jealous for their own good.
oh, and we don't suck at Hockey, we invented the damn sport (along with Basketball, Baseball, and the North American Variant of Football)
This is the way professional advertizing etc. work.
Get one cigarette, then buy 600 after you get addicted.
...we use open-source software for nearly everything at the datacenter, and on a few desktops in the office (GAIM has made inroads among the marketing staff, and I run a GNOME desktop). Our attempts to use commercial software have usually meant restrictions that we couldn't live with (we tried using Zeus for our hosting customers and ended up trashing it and using Apache 2.0 because we couldn't extend it as we wanted to. Expensive mistake!)
The only commercial software we are seriously looking at on the server side right now is Caucho Resin Enterprise - it definitely beats out Tomcat for our purposes.
It just seems to be the default here. If you run a company, open source is the first option. Everybody worth hiring has a background in Unixish operating systems and open tools. Resumes from people with Microsoft credentials tend to end up in the circular file unless they have some serious programming achievements under their belts and at least _some_ familiarity with common open software.
And what's wrong with having others work for free? It's THEIR choice, so why shouldn't I try and make a profit from it? You know, if people could sell air and water, they WOULD. It's the American Way... everyone tries to make a buck somehow.
I guess two of the three Canadian moderators are upset.
There goes the karma.
Most IT guys Ive worked with knew and respected Linux. On one hand is the credibility thing, you need someone to point fingers to. For that reason I've been using the RedHat company and OpenBSD organization. Spend the money and buy copies (CDs) of the OS from them, and it becomes cheaper than Windows rather that (gasp) free! Companies want someone to point fingers to.
Theres also a strong affinity towards Linux. There are VPN technologies out there but most prefer to run the VPN box on Linux. However most applications needed by the organization are dependent on win32:
(1) ERP system. This requires Win32 or iSeries V5R3. Win32 is cheaper.
(2) Office suite. I could roll out OO but that will take some training and struggle.
(3) Lotus Notes. This runs only on OSX and win32. I cant switch to OSX because of the other apps.
(4) All the reporting tools like Crystal etc. They are resisting Linux for now.
(5) Active Directory Integration. Using OpenLDAP its still a bit of a struggle.
So gentlemen, it will take time!
"Give orange me give eat orange me eat orange give me eat orange give me you." -Nim Chimpsky
To play devil's advocate here, while you get to keep the results of an Open Source project, you don't get paid for it. At least with closed source, sure some faceless corporation owns the work but you got paid for it, and you can use that money to do stuff like, oh... pay your mortgage so that you can own a house in exchange for not owning the software. Eventually, this "work for free" thing has to break down. Not everyone can live with their parents forever.
OSS has more traction than you think, friend. It's the best friend I have right now, and I'm a hardware monkey/network admin/IT manager.
Open source is an integral part of the enterprise environment these days in larger organizations, but that doesnt mean that its "linux on every desktop".
Agreed, except for the "in larger organisations" part. I do the above job for a not so large outfit, and Open Source is something I try to employ as much as possible.
But we are still some distance from "open source dominating the environments", open source is gaining traction mostly in the areas where the developers have a big say in what is chosen. When it comes to the choice of "backbone platform", this is still very much a management choice of commercial platforms.
Open source may not be deployed everywhere in my company (yet), but it does affect any decision I make - in a round about way, it does dominate the environment. "Do I need to pay this company licensing fees, or is there an OSS equivalent package that will do it for less?" is something I muse every day on he job. I manage infrastructure, and right now, I'm deploying Linux as the backbone of my network, replacing a proprietary systems that adds no value when compared to the OSS alternative. I'm not a developer (any code I write shows it, too), but I like having the OSS clue stick to apply to the heads of any arrogant vendors (Quark, you are sooooo next in line for lumber off the forehead). The threat of OSS to thier bottom line is extremely valuable to me in keeping costs down and vendors honest.
IMHO, one of the main reasons that OSS exists is because some developers got a little too full of themselves and in thier arrogance pissed off the wrong people - end users like me. If most people weren't willing to actually use OSS, it simply would not be as pervasive as it is.
Soko
"Depression is merely anger without enthusiasm." - Anonymous
I wish we could use open source management. The problem with proprietary management is the same as software: overpriced, bloated, slow and full of bugs. As a consultant, I've spent a great deal of time at some corporate dinosaurs and they all seem to be bogged down by the same ineffective, self-important conventional idiots. I won't name companies, but be weary of the cars you drive...
I am not at all contesting that open source is disrupting proprietary software in a big way, but its not dominant (as of yet). Personally though, I think it eventually _will be_.
But it is taking the traditional low-end route: getting traction first through developers, and then moving its way up the food-chaing slowly but certainly.
I am actually in the process of ending my work at said "big global consultancy" to start out on my own with a couple of friends: we will most likely use mostly OSS software, all the way form linux desktops. So for a smaller company, open source is definitely here and a wonderful possibility for small companies.
What's that all "aboot"
Trolling aside, you can interview 9 out of 10 business in Canada and they will chant Linux till the cops beat them up. But the missing #10 is the most important: Government. Canada is really just a big awkward government with a nice back yard, and Gov't is dead scared of free software, for several reasons that were hammered into my skull the hard way:
1. It's built by "evil hackers"
2. Since it's free, Mr CIO can't farm it out as a big money contract to one of his mates, or one-up that and hire them all under his wings as 'consultants'.
3. Since it's free, there is no one being paid to answer the phone when stuff breaks.
4. Billco likes Linux, and Gov't doesn't like Billco; therefore Gov't doesn't like Linux.
Ok so I pulled #4 out of my ass. The other 3 are still quite true. I'm not taking stabs at the PM either, even though he's in deep dog-poo for doing #2 (and getting caught), but like anything it's far too easy to spend other people's money irresponsibly.
-Billco, Fnarg.com
Sometimes I like commercial. Often, the support is better, particularly if you want something mission-critical and the OSS software project is small (some OSS projects, it's one or two guys doing it in their spare time. I'd rather not have a support contract on that basis).
Sometimes I like OSS. You can see the code, so that's some insurance, you can modify it quickly yourself.
One library that we've paid for, I'm looking to replace with OSS, but I want to make sure that it's proven as reasonably stable before making the switch, and that we've done some work on the source code ourselves to ensure that we are familiar with it.
Goog point. You would need some major cojones to try and sell air and water to we Americans!
Almost all major companies use "Open Source" all over the place. They have for years, decades even.
The only difference might be that the muppets who think they are in charge now have to have an "open source stratagem", mainly because "Open Source" is now a brand all of it's own.
Government of the people, by corporate executives, for corporate profits.
How about selling you some English grammar and spelling courses? Looks like you could really use them.
SO true.. The feds here are really behind as far as IT in general goes, I found. I worked for 3 years at HRDC ending about a year ago, and it was only within the last six months I was there that our desktops were upgraded from Windows 95 to Windows 2000 (as in a good while after winXP came out.. Our office LAN was this old VINES network that apparently the vendor didn't even support any more, and it went down constantly.
The one bright side was that my particular group used Perl quite a bit. I became very adept at perl after a while there, which was fun.
That depends on where you are looking. In Thailand for example about 60% of desktops are preinstalled with Linux already.
Also OpenSource Apache runs an over 65% (and still increasing) share of webservers.
Informative?! This is an obvious troll.
You don't get paid money for it in the traditional corporate-world sense, no. But you do get knowledge and experience that can't be measured in terms of pounds and pence.
Just because you are writing Open Source software doesn't mean you can't earn a living while you do so. It won't support itself. It won't train its own users. Some people will prefer to pay for a stamped CD and printed manuals, rather than download from the net and read on-screen. There are even other ways of living beside making heaps of money and owning your own home or staying with your parents forever.
Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
I work as a developer for a hospital here in canada. We develop all of our shit in Java, and use open source products both for development and in our apps pretty much constantly. Most of our major projects have at least 5 apache/jakarta projects within.
As long as there are closed-source products that can benefit from open-source products ("benefit" may not necessarily mean "include code"; you can sell proprietary software through GPL'd webservers running GNU/Linux, etc.), OSS will be mildly unfair at the border between OSS and proprietary software. Many believe that OSS's intrinsic benefits outweigh this "exploitation", as you put it, and still continue to support OSS.
You get paid to contribute to closed source software. You can buy cook things with the money you make. You can quit if you like. You could have written the same software by yourself at home if you wanted. This is in no way, shape or form similar to slavery. I'd suggest you educate yourself on slavery a bit. Closed source software is "akin to slavery" like a stubbed toe is "akin to cancer."
I'm curious, which departments do you know of that are using OSS? In all my time working there, I found that it was very rare for any of the IT -managers- to have even -heard- of open source. It was completely ass-backwards.
I now work in health care though (technically for the province I guess), and we use OSS quite a bit.
I'm confused, is it bad for a CEO to go for cheaper resources that can harm employees or is it good?
When it's Open Source it seems to be good, yet this harms other developers (those that actually charge for software), but when it's outsourcing your high cost developers to cheaper developers India it's bad?
Chances are, in a few years I'll be self-employed in the legal world and, although it's it extremely small scale as far as IT deployment is concerned, I plan on using as much OSS as I can.
I'm sure I won't be able to get away from some proprietary software (office suite?), but at least I'll try to encourage the companies doing good things (ie. Mac workstations but Linux or *BSD servers).
I've always been curious (maybe this should go in a Ask Slashdot post -- hmmm) to know what others are doing in the legal world.
Treehugger? Treehugger... Treehugger!
Some of us paid attention in class, and some of us didn't.
But then of course we only have the poster's word for it that they are, in fact, an actual journalist.
You create a two page Community Newsletter, distributed to thirty people, and skimmed by four of them? Go ahead, tell everybody and yourself that you're a journalist.
It doesn't seem too difficult to become a genuine, real-deal "writer" or "author" or "journalist" these days. Hell, even Michael Sims claims to be one.
Of course we use it, ya hoser: it's free, eh. More money to spend on Labatts and Leafs tickets.
It's the best friend I have right now, and I'm a hardware monkey/network admin/IT manager.
/. say it is. I bet the vast majority of them are using Windows.
So there is your answer right there. You are not a developer and you admitted that you cannot code for shit therefore you are basically just another clueless person who goes with the flow of the great clueless hordes. You install OSS simply because you think it is 1337 and kewl because all the other clueless monkeys here at
Leave OSS to developers and coders and those of us WHO KNOW WHAT THEY ARE DOING!
Although I prefer to do it (the writing, pervert! ;) with MacOS X
Why is that? To me it seems it wouldn't matter at all if you use Windows, Linux or Mac for this. Could you please elaborate?
Quark? The only place I recognize that name from is layout software, but that can't be right. Are you referring to some other product, or is there finally an open source layout system with a decent UI that's actaully USABLE?
I used to be a coder. I was very good at it. Top of my class in fact. But you know what? It's just not for me. I found programming to be tedious beyond all measure. But I love computers, always have, ever since I started playing with the first primitive models in the late 70's, early 80's. So what to do? This: I'm a "network monkey", like the grandparent poster. I'm responsible for a very sizable installation, but that doesn't stop me crawling therough cobweb-infested ducts to repair cable faults, because I enjoy it. I like playing with routers, and servers, and satellite links. I get a kick out of diagnosing faults in buried cables as much as I do formulating and implementing enterprise-wide security auditing policy and procedures. I certainly like that stuff a whole bunch more than I ever enjoyed coding. It's interesting and it's fun. And we use a mixture of OSS and proprietry products, ssimply because I make the most from whatever tools I have to hand. And the thing I notice often is that developers with your attitude -- namely that coders are gods, and network people are clueless lusers -- are usually the most technically-unproficient people around. They can't even reinstall an OS properly half the time. Now run along and play some more CS, and bitch about the obvious cheaters who keep 0wning you.
Sorry, but that does play into it. Microsoft is a US corporation, and the US isn't exactly in high regard up here, what with your moron in the white house.
People view using linux over MS as sticking it to MS with their pocketbooks. And MS is almost synonymous with the United States. I don't need to elaborate.
occultae nullus est respectus musicae - originally a Greek proverb
It's not because 9 out of ten person answered considering/using open source that 9 out of then entreprises use it. open source can also mean some P2P software, server software or digital thieving tools (playfair and the like). It doesn't mean that 9 out of then company uses Linux. I work in AV for coorporate events (amongst other things) I do a lot of conventions with a lot of entreprise in various domain, pharmaceutical, business associations, health, governments, technology...
The most Linux box I've seen at the same convention was 6-7, I can assure you that more and more scientific coorporations/peoples are now using macs, in the past 3 month we saw more macs than ever before at conventions, if the convention was about pharmaceutical, health, genomics, physics or nanotech, the proportion of macs even surpass the windows one (one of those convention had around 60% macs, out of 5000 attendees from around the world... (APS) ).
As for the people I speak with in those conventions (rough proportions: 20% salespeople, 30-40% employees/students/consultants, 20% presidents/CEO, 20% marketing/public relation) most of them don't use, aren't interested in open-source or Linux (they know it exist but they haven't used it), the exception being tech and science people.
Don't get me wrong I am not saying the result of the survey isn't right all I'm saying is that it puts open-source in the wrong light, I believe it is indeed very common in Canada but not as much as those results reflects.
If you work on a Closed Source project, some faceless corporation owns everything you put into it.
That's why you get a paycheck. In case you haven't noticed, EVERY job that involves working for a company, they get to benefit & keep whatever it is you're working on, whether it's a manufacturing plant, a retail store, a service company, etc. Working on closed source projects is no more slavery than working at McDonald's.
I already sent you the information. Your email is anonymous_coward@slashdot.org right?
...OpenSource Mainstreams you!
Insightful?? Mod down, mod down! Canadians are the most truthful and honorable people around.
Americans invented hockey eh? Just another example of an arrogant american assface that lives in his arrogant american assface bubble.
Hockey was invented in Nova Scotia, CANADA.
"Now, I fear, some high and mighty VP has decided that Windose is the way to go. I have been forced to witness the slow transformation of our key systems go from Linux to you know what..."
You know what? Don't keep us in suspense.
If you work on a Closed Source project, some faceless corporation owns everything you put into it.
Whereas, in your philosophy, they should pay you to write software and then you should own it yourself. Would you like them to give you a new car or house, too? How 'bout a [hotter] girlfriend?
I don't care what the survey says, around here it's all Microshit (dammit!) The place is crawling with MCSE's and no one I ever meet has ever heard of Linux or OSS. Some have, then talked to their local Microshit rep. about it and asked them if they should try it. You would be shocked by the replies they get, followed by longer term contracts to Microshit and (yet more) Minesweeper Certified Solitaire Experienced technology wannabes crawling around the place. The survey wasn't taken anywhere close to where I live (mind you the survey could be from 3200 miles (oops, I meant to type 5100 km) away and still be in Canada).
I suppose you could go and live on a hill and eat grass. But relating it to slavery? Are you stupid? People *choose* to work for companies, and they trade the rights to what they produce for money. Slavery would be never being allowed to quit, or not getting paid, or being shackled to your chair. At any time, you can go and tell your boss to fuck off, and then walk out of the office and never return. This isn't slavery. It's a choice.
What a dumbass.
damn, you really got me with that link! I never would have known that the [goat.cx] domain which shows up after the link would lead me to the goatse site! Shit, I'll bet you're really proud of yourself, aren'tcha?
i live in Ottawa Canada (the capital) and the only System Admin or 'IT' jobs avail here are Windoze related (Exchange, Netware, etc)... i think i've only seen 1 UNIX sysadmin job posted on monster.ca and jobbank.gov.ca in the last 3 months.
[open source] is not dominant (as of yet). Personally though, I think it eventually _will be_. ... moving its way up the food-chaing slowly but certainly.
... Low for enterprise software (ERP, CRM), collaborative software etc."
"The maturity levels of open source for enterprise use are perceived to be:
That's where the real payout for open source lies, IMNSHO. The path is long hard and slow. The skills and software that are required are extremely difficult. There are no quick and easy fixes. The software needs to be trustworthy, not just my use of my software, but your use as it affects him which indirectly affects me. So much talk about Supply Chain seems to believe that there's only ONE link in the chain. We need to be able to trust the entire infrastructure, and that's not possible with multiple disparate proprietary "solutions". Oddly enough, this is where the hackers and big business are very much on the same side. The common enemy is bugs, with "security holes" being the least of the problems.
A choice of masters is not freedom.
It would be more interesting to know what percentage of companies see OSSing their own stuff as part of their IT strategy.
I have used OSS tools in all of the 5 companies I have worked for. All but one of them could be considered that a critical part of their business would stop working (in the short term at least) if those tools disappeared in the morning. None of them however has ever had any intention of releasing the source to anything they develop, even if they didn't make money directly from that SW.
It's a small sample I know, but I would imagine that most companies are the same as those I have worked for.
Nine out of ten businesses using free software isn't a big deal. A better milestone would be when only nine out of ten, or fewer, are using proprietary software.
-- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
If you include python and perl in your definition of open source. Big 5 bank I know has either a python based app or perl on every desktop and server.
Python is typically used for a desktop and perl on the (unix) server side.
Intranet site is generated dynamically with python. Mail system is dependant on Sendmail (with license).