Slashdot Mirror


Convincing Your Employer To Go With FOSS?

mark72005 writes "My employer is currently looking at adopting a content management system for use by our technical support staff (primarily first-line end user support, but hopefully it will include deeper levels of support personnel eventually). The candidates are currently Plone (OSS) and Confluence (proprietary, closed-source). For those with experience in each, what arguments in favor of Plone could be made to managers more interested in pragmatism than idealism?"

79 of 369 comments (clear)

  1. It's tougher than you think... by RocketRabbit · · Score: 4, Insightful

    My problem has been convincing them that they con't just pass of the cost of Windows to the customer. They like the fact that they can hire 3-4 MCSEs for the cost of one good Unix admin, but they don't realize that the Unix admin can set things up so that maintenance is much easier.

    Windows is ingrained in business culture here, for the most part.

    1. Re:It's tougher than you think... by Monkeedude1212 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Our company is even worse than that - we have shown them the cost savings of switching from Microsoft Office (Standard) to Open Office, demo'd the interoperability and the ease of switching, but because it's not Microsoft they just can't consider it "reliable".

      It makes me want to rip my hair out. Then glue it on their faces as silly mustaches. Point is it makes me have crazy thoughts.

    2. Re:It's tougher than you think... by mangu · · Score: 5, Insightful

      because it's not Microsoft they just can't consider it "reliable".

      Tell them Open Office comes from Oracle.

    3. Re:It's tougher than you think... by HaZardman27 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Mod parent insightful. I never actually considered this "benefit" of the Sun buyout. ^_^

      --
      Apparently wizard is not a legitimate career path, so I chose programmer instead.
    4. Re:It's tougher than you think... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Tell them Open Office comes from Oracle.

      You say that like it's a good thing.

    5. Re:It's tougher than you think... by Nadaka · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Everyone knows that oracle makes software that costs hundreds of thousands of dollars...
      so it has to be good, right?

    6. Re:It's tougher than you think... by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Tell them Open Office comes from Oracle.

      You say that like it's a good thing.

      To the people who make decisions, it is.

    7. Re:It's tougher than you think... by Hylandr · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You might also notice, that various versions of MS office don't instantly inter-operate properly either.

      - Dan.

      --
      ~ People that think they are better than anyone else for any reason are the cause of all the strife in the world.
    8. Re:It's tougher than you think... by PingPongBoy · · Score: 2, Funny

      My problem has been convincing them that they con't just pass of the cost of Windows to the customer. They like the fact that they can hire 3-4 MCSEs for the cost of one good Unix admin, but they don't realize that the Unix admin can set things up so that maintenance is much easier

      That kind of math is pretty narrow minded, if you think about it. The whole world has become a better place because of computers, hasn't it? The "customers" for a lot of businesses are just ordinary people, and as such rely on Windows, and so far Windows has been quite reliable. Windows has brought joy and good fortune to these customers - is it such a bad thing then to charge them a little extra because businesses look forward to a better future with Windows?

      The whole computer industry could not have evolved so quickly without the cash input from non-Unix users, and businesses find comfort in a unified computer industry. Businesses will buy into Windows as long as Microsoft and hardware makers are working on better technology. The free software is nice, but it has to be paid for somehow or else it doesn't keep up.

      Indeed, only 15 years ago, when Windows 95 came into being, Unix computers cost as much as cars, so it was the Wintel combination that brought costs down to earth while making user interaction very intuitive. Without the efforts at Microsoft, we might have little choice than to buy really expensive machines right now and some clunky software choices.

      FOSS and Microsoft together keep prices down. Without FOSS, Microsoft would be just as pricey as can be, but if Microsoft stopped, the motivation behind FOSS would be shrivel up.

      --
      Know your pads. One time pad: good for cryptography. Two timing pad: where to take your mistress.
    9. Re:It's tougher than you think... by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's not reliability they worry about, but liability... that, and going with the "safe" choice. Oh, and Microsoft is indeed the safe choice when things go south... because the manager responsible for selecting MS can divert the blame to them. Remember the old adage "nobody has ever been fired for choosing IBM"? Same thing. Conversely, if you pick a FOSS product and things go south, you are very likely to hear the phrase "what were you thinking?!".

      As to liability, that is a real concern when you use FOSS, especially if you're a juicy fat corporate target. If Microsoft infringes on some patent or other, no big whoop, the patent holder will sue Microsoft and you as a customer will most likely not notice a thing. But if some FOSS product infringes on a patent, your company will be the target. At best you will be ordered to cease using the software, at worst you will be sued for damages. A client of mine actually had this happen to them (and they paid, too).

      The good news is: both concerns can be addressed. To avoid blame for picking a dud falling on your manager's head, spread the blame. Get buy-in from as many stakeholders as you can, especially those high up in the food chain: the budget holder, company architect, service managers, project office manager, what have you... and when you approach one, make it clear that you will get (or already have) at least a tentative approval from the others. We've used this approach on one FOSS project, which in the end did get the green light.

      To avoid legal exposure to IP infringements, find another company to take this risk off your hands by having them act as a "reseller". To my surprise there are actually quite a few companies offering FOSS solutions who are willing to take that risk, for a fee.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    10. Re:It's tougher than you think... by jeko · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Better yet, tell them Plone comes from Oracle... :-)

      --
      He put his boots up on the table and made a face. "The sig," he smirked. "You can waste your life in search of the sig."
    11. Re:It's tougher than you think... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      - Ora... who?
      - You know the datab..
      - Office is from Microsoft not from some Greek company, used it all my life and I tell you it's Microso...
      - No, I am saying Open Office, not...
      - Look, I don't need to open office to tell you it's from Microsoft, now get back to work!

    12. Re:It's tougher than you think... by Monkeedude1212 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I do actually. I Expect the Next 3 versions of Open Office to work a lot more seemlessly than the past 3 versions of Microsoft Office.

    13. Re:It's tougher than you think... by mcrbids · · Score: 4, Funny

      I'm gonna get a karma beating for saying this, but sadly, Open Office isn't entirely reliable. Yes, it works well for smaller projects, is free, cross platform, and mostly compatible with MS office.

      But there are.... issues. Like the autonumbering makes you want to axe murder somebody. Spacing in Impress has a beeeelion little weirds.

      And... get this! The spreadsheet can't have more than 65535 rows! Here it is, 2010 and I have a roaring, quadcore laptop with 8 GB of RAM and a TB hard drive, and I'm limited to an architecture that was considered limiting 10 or more hardware generations ago?!?

      OoO is sadly just not as good, and it isn't until you lose 100,000 rows of financial data that you start to appreciate just how bad this actually is. (Which has never happened to me but not everybody is as anally retentive about backups as I am)

      I really wish I were an astrotufing MS shill, but I'm a Linux nerd with more than a decade as such...(check my UID)

      --
      I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
    14. Re:It's tougher than you think... by zeropointburn · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Like all posts about Microsoft products vs. open-source products, this post (the one you're reading right now) and its parent boil down to anecdotal evidence and personal preference. So, with the understanding that this is my opinion and not the intentional start of a flame war, read on.

      What exactly about Excel makes Calc look like a joke? My anecdotal experience is that it is at least twice as fast and I can find things in fairly logical places instead of a stupid ribbon. I use Calc for eve online industry calculations, which mirror fairly closely the actual data gathering, analysis, and projection work of a real business. What's your anecdotal experience?

      If your people needed training to switch from Microsoft Office to Open Office, then they also needed training to be able to use the present version of Microsoft Office vs. the previous version of Microsoft Office, which is still nothing compared to the training costs of Vista/Win7.

      Two other things to consider: if you have the latest and greatest MS product, you'll be saving in a format that only that version can read (at first, anyway). If you have the latest and greatest Open Office, you'll be saving in a format that both Open Office and Microsoft Office (any fairly recent version) can read. When you switch up with MS, you'll have the inevitable horde of people saving in the new, incompatible format and customers who can't open their documents without paying the Microsoft upgrade tax.
      Second, the site license is the real reason we still use Microsoft Office in business. Early adopters amongst customers or contractors will mean that someone in the enterprise needs to have the latest Microsoft offering to be able to read or convert their files. If one person needs it, why not several? If several people have it, we'd better do a site license 'cause the BSA swat team might show up for an audit. So, businesses talk themselves into the site license to avoid jackbooted thuggery. Once you have a site license, there's no reason to switch.

      Besides, trying to force a switch to OO is pointless... roll it out alongside Microsoft Office and let the people with a clue get on with things while the rest lag behind.

      --
      -1 raving lunatic; +6 subGenius... Things even out...
    15. Re:It's tougher than you think... by dkleinsc · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It's not really about reliability.

      It's about philosophy. One of the unwritten qualifications for the upper echelons of corporate management is believing wholeheartedly that capitalist corporations are the most efficient way of producing the highest quality goods and services (and it should be pointed out that for many products, they're absolutely right). After all, if you didn't believe in corporations, why would you make the sacrifices necessary to get to an upper management position?

      And here come a bunch of long-haired hippies who explain how their stuff is better. But it can't be, because it's not produced by a corporation. I mean, which car is more reliable, the old beat-up Thunderbird your mechanic brother-in-law tinkered with constantly, or the one just driven off the Mercedes parking lot? And then cognitive dissonance creeps in: If the hippies' stuff actually is better, then perhaps the corporation isn't always right, and perhaps the manager has wasted his better years in the office rather than spending quality time with his children.

      Software is one of those strange products where "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need" really works well, because there's tiny tiny costs (namely, downloading bandwidth) for having freeloaders. But for those who've bought completely into capitalism, they react about as well to this idea as a Unix geek would to converting their beloved webservers to run IIS.

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    16. Re:It's tougher than you think... by bell.colin · · Score: 2, Informative

      Ah, The hippie-commie argument about Linux/FOSS (even free stuff can "make" money.)

      Just send these to the upper management types and tell them to open up thier WSJ paper and look in the finance section. (Linux "is" making money)

      GOOG
      IBM
      RHT
      ORCL

      They may not know as much about RedHat or Oracle, but you would have to be living in a cave for 20 Years not to know who Google is and they Damn sure know who IBM is. Hell as far as the hippie crowds go tell them to look at Apple (APPL) which is starting to surpass Microsoft. (Even Hippies are greedy capitalists.)

      FOSS is actually a prime example of how Free-Market capitalism is "supposed" to work, Undercut the competition and create a better product for less. Seems that free can undercut the big boys and make money. (win-win)

    17. Re:It's tougher than you think... by Amouth · · Score: 2, Insightful

      honestly it has made things a little easier for me trying to get it in use - although the BIGEST hurdle is the lacking of a mail client/server combo that is comparable to outlook/exchange.

      I'll bash MS with everyone else - but outlook/exchange/project just don't have good oss/gnu replacements

      --
      '...if only "Jumping to a Conclusion" was an event in the Olympics.'
    18. Re:It's tougher than you think... by bell.colin · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's probably best not to try and deploy it as a replacement, but as a supplement.

      For a several years now we would install it and have users use it turn their .doc files into .pdf (instead of buying $150 Adobe Pro.) We have added it as part of our default image for the last 3 years (now Office 2007 Pro. % OO 3.x)

      There are some features that we have used in OO for auto-document creation from a SQL Database (used it to pull fields from a system and autocreate 1000's of cards pre-printed with Names and other info to reduce the amount that had to be filled in later, Could not find anything like this in Word 2002/2003 (have not tried in 2007) and using Access forms just looked horrible and would never come out right but OO Writer did this from a blank document to a template to an exported .pdf ready to print in minutes.

      It's there and every now and then it is able to actually fix MS documents that hang while loading, i.e. if a user created a file from a corrupted template that was originally in an OLD outdated network share years ago and the file still has it referenced somehow, now every time a file created from that template is opened (after the server the share was on died) it times out trying to open the old UNC location. we could find no way to fix this within office, but found that by opening it OO it would load immediately so they opened then re-saved them and now Office has no issue with them.

    19. Re:It's tougher than you think... by homesnatch · · Score: 3, Informative

      To be fair, Excel did not support more than 65k rows until Excel 2010.

    20. Re:It's tougher than you think... by bell.colin · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Part of the problem with these certs. (i have an MCSE and took the classes) is that they teach you the MS way of doing things and that (like apple) everything just magically works, until you actually implement them in the "Real World" and find all the various tricks/hacks that you have to do to get it working. (luckily i had one of those instructors who was always telling us the parts that we need to know for the MS tests and what we "Really" needed to about xyz setup types like AD, Permissions, File Shares, various methods, etc... what worked and what didn't from various experiences and that every thing else we would learn over time and that would not getting a cert and put directly in charge at the top of any of this (seriously who thinks they can just get a cert for something new a be put in charge on day one for something they've never done before)

      Every AD/File Share/GPO/Exchange setup is different there is no magic standard one-size fits all way of windows, And the only thing I've learned after 10 years is that books/tests don't actually teach you anything except how to pass the damn test which is basically just look at the MS website and note whatever marketting bullet points are listed and read everything you can about them.

      When i took my test for 2000 Pro./Server/AD the sales pitch of the year was the all new RIS in Windows 2000 guess how many actually 2000 Pro./Server/AD questions i had to answer? "NONE AT ALL!", now guess how many were RIS? "EVERY DAMN ONE!" I've never actually used RIS in our environment once, never even installed the damn thing outside a test server once or twice to play with. (always used Ghost and Sysprep for our production deployment) Don't care if i ever use RIS or not.

      Experience/Time and Actually setting the damn thing up and playing with it in a test environment are the only things that actually teach you anything. i.e. setup an AD server and some clients, make some groups and see how GPOs are applied and how they work, delete your DNS zone files, hose the AD registry, lockout all the domain admin account, delete some exchange folders blindly, etc... and then try to fix them.

      Basically TEST everything, then do it again everything else is most likely something that isn't in the books and you just have to learn as you go.

    21. Re:It's tougher than you think... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      To be even more fair it did in Excel 2007.

    22. Re:It's tougher than you think... by cas2000 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      and to be even fairer than that - if you actually run into that limitation, if you have a spreadsheet with anywhere near 65K rows then UR DOING IT WRONG.

      whatever it is you are doing, there are *far* better ways of doing it than with a spreadsheet.

    23. Re:It's tougher than you think... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Tell them Open Office comes from Oracle.

      honestly it has made things a little easier for me trying to get it in use - although the BIGEST hurdle is the lacking of a mail client/server combo that is comparable to outlook/exchange.

      If you're looking for an Oracle solution, Oracle itself uses Oracle Beehive[free download] for email/calendaring/file sharing/conferencing/chat, with Thunderbird/Lightning or the included Zimbra web interface as the main clients. Any IMAP/CalDAV/WebDav/XMPP clients will work though. A single instance supports more than 100,000 accounts.

    24. Re:It's tougher than you think... by jwhitener · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm not sure what *far* better way you envision.

      Accountants, those in finance, etc.. generally do not have any computer skills outside of Excel. They routinely work with large data sets. I remember finance dept. folks working around the 65k limit by having 65k rows per tab, and then combining calculations on the rows on a final tab.

      The amount of excel equations, nesting, and loops was actually pretty impressive for having no programming experience. When I supported those types of workers, I remember having some success moving certain parts of their work into real databases, making web front ends, etc.. for their data, but quite a bit of it stayed in spreadsheets.

      Financial folks often need to do pretty complex calculations, and excel provides a fairly intuitive way to start with small step calculations, and combine those many small steps into something that resembles a full blown program.

  2. Cost by 0racle · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Free. Thats really all that is required here, but then I work for a bunch of cheapskates who won't be around much longer.

    --
    "I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
    1. Re:Cost by Jimmy+King · · Score: 2, Funny

      Hey, I'm waving at you over the cubicle wall right now. How's it going over there?

    2. Re:Cost by Anonymusing · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Plone is only "free" in software. In my experience with open source CMSs -- Plone, Typo3, Drupal, Joomla -- you get best results by paying an expert to program and set it up initially to your specs. It looks better, runs smoother, etc.

      I'm not that expert, by the way. I've just worked on projects that lacked an expert, and projects that had one, and the difference in result was night and day. The expertly-configured sites ran much better.

      --
      Liberal? Conservative? Compare perspectives at Left-Right
  3. Confluence did not impress me by grahamwest · · Score: 4, Informative

    I've used TWiki (OSS, all Perl IIRC and aimed at corporate usage) at one job and Confluence at another but not Plone. Confluence is good for non-technical people because it has a pretty good wysiwig editor, but its search was simply wretched. I think we had a lot of 'lost' knowledge in the Confluence DB because nobody knew it was there and the obvious searches didn't show it - I would come across nuggets now and then. If you have the discipline to build index pages, it's probably a good choice if you have a lot of non-engineer type people.

    TWiki (and this was a number of years ago so it may have improved) was almost the reverse. Good search, good architecture for plugins, but no wysiwyg so non-technical contributors had trouble with it. They were writing a wysiwyg plugin so that may have now arrived. It was easy to maintain and of the two I would say I like it better.

    --
    Graham
    1. Re:Confluence did not impress me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative
      My group evaluated about a half dozen wiki products. We ultimately went with Confluence for a few reasons:
      • Fine grained ACL rather than locked/unlocked
      • Good editor that doesn't rely on IE (one requirement was that it works in Linux, which is why we didn't go with the corporate sharepoint)
      • Supports LDAP including groups
      • You can edit in Word (or Excel?) on the wiki if you have a plugin
      • Product suite integration with Jira

      Yes the search sucks. You can use tagging to sort out things to some extent but good organization is key.
      One "benefit" is that it can import from several other wiki solutions including Mediawiki which was our old solution. While the importer works, formatting is trashed so you pretty much have to have someone go and clean up after it.

    2. Re:Confluence did not impress me by plebeian · · Score: 2, Informative

      WYSIWIG is not reason enough to go with confluence. If you want to do any fancy formating/Custom CSS it is a bear to work with. I recently transitioned the internal webserver for my agency (~400 users) to a Sharepoint services site because maintaining Confluence on Windows was such a pain. Every patch basically required building a new instance, updating all the plugins, and then copying all of our customizations over to the new instance. I am sure it is easier on a Linux platform but if you are looking to run it on a MS Test the upgrade process before you make a decision. I have not built a site in Plone yet, so I cannot comment on it.

      --
      "I myself am made entirely of flaws, stitched together with good intentions."
  4. Stallman's answer by MrEricSir · · Score: 4, Funny

    I once asked Richard Stallman how to convince my school to go with FOSS instead of Windows, since most of our CS lab was on Windows.

    His reply: "Defenestration! Throw Windows out of the computer, or throw the computer out the window!"

    --
    There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
    1. Re:Stallman's answer by kwabbles · · Score: 3, Insightful

      > Both are unhinged advocates for changes that will NEVER happen without first finding a genie.

      Stallman's changes are already happening and as far as I know he has no access to a genie. If he had a genie he'd share it.

      --
      Just disrupt the deflector shield with a tachyon burst.
    2. Re:Stallman's answer by drsmack1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Maybe he would wait until December 25th and share it as a Grav-mass gift.

      As far as I can tell, the only thing that separates Richard Stallman from the bum that lives under a bridge near my home and rants incoherently at strangers is that Stallman has the ability to code.

      How someone's personality disorder became a religion is beyond me. Oh, wait - *All* religions start that way.

    3. Re:Stallman's answer by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Stallman is the Michael Savage of software. He seems reasonable until you hear him speak or read his writings.

      Stallman is utterly unreasonable. He's also correct pretty much every time he predicts something. I wish the world had a few more unreasonable visionaries who were unwilling to compromise on their goals to make this a better place.

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    4. Re:Stallman's answer by kwabbles · · Score: 2, Funny

      > As far as I can tell, the only thing that separates Richard Stallman from the bum that lives under a bridge near my home and rants
      > incoherently at strangers is that Stallman has the ability to code.

      You'd be surprised. I got into an argument with a bum under a bridge once about using sbcl instead of clisp. It seemed that decent multi-threading support wasn't important to him at the moment. Are you sure the incoherent ranting isn't just instruction mnemonics?

      --
      Just disrupt the deflector shield with a tachyon burst.
    5. Re:Stallman's answer by Beelzebud · · Score: 4, Informative

      Yeah except for that small detail about Stallman actually contributing something positive to the world. You may not like the guy's opinions, but he's contributed greatly to the world in the form of being one of the pioneers of the entire free software movement. Putting him in the category of a Michael Savage is not only completely unfair, but also just plain ignorant.

    6. Re:Stallman's answer by fishexe · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Stallman is the Michael Savage of software. He seems reasonable until you hear him speak or read his writings.

      Stallman is utterly unreasonable. He's also correct pretty much every time he predicts something. I wish the world had a few more unreasonable visionaries who were unwilling to compromise on their goals to make this a better place.

      I just wish the ones we have would learn effective communication skills.

      --
      "I don't care about the Constitution!" --Bill O'Reilly, November 17, 2009
  5. Liferay by Tepar · · Score: 4, Informative

    Might I suggest Liferay (http://www.liferay.com)? Open source, but also commercial, and more featureful than both Plone and Confluence.

  6. Wrong order by MozeeToby · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You've obviously decided which piece of software you want to recommend even though the only reason you can think of to recommend it is that it is FOSS? If the open software isn't as good it just isn't as good; just because it's FOSS doesn't mean that it is the be all and end all to solve your problems. Compare features, stability, cost, and support; if your boss is actively against FOSS make a point to explain it's advantages (and disadvantages if you want to be fair) and leave the decision to him. After all, it's entirely possible that the closed, proprietary solution fits your situation better; basically, its dishonest to make your decision and then go digging specifically for evidence to support that decision.

    1. Re:Wrong order by port23user · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This is right on the mark. As an employee, you're ethically obligated to help the company make the best decision for the company. It's not your place to decide to promote open source for the sake of open source.

      This doesn't mean that open source is bad. You (and your manager) should objectively identify the advantages and disadvantages of each solution.

    2. Re:Wrong order by Dancindan84 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Exactly. You don't convince them. The software should convince them. Go through the pros and cons of each (features, cost, support, interoperability, scalability) and let them decide.

      After that, IF the OSS product is superior and they're scared of the OSS boogieman enough to go with an inferior product after you've clearly outlined everything, you probably aren't going to be able to change their mind.

      --
      "Always forgive your enemies; nothing annoys them so much." - Oscar Wilde
    3. Re:Wrong order by kiwimate · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Hear hear!

      For those with experience in each, what argument could be made in favor of Plone to managers interested in pragmatism rather than idealism?

      If the questioner doesn't actually already have some compelling arguments in favor of this particular solution, then he is making his choice based on idealism instead of pragmatism.

      Do an honest evaluation based on criteria that are important to your organization (including upfront cost, ongoing support, etc) and see what wins. Use a scoring spreadsheet or a decision making tool. You may decide that "open source vs. closed source" counts for 5% of your overall evaluation grade. Adherence to functional requirements may count for another 30%. NFR a further 15%. Whatever. That will produce your compelling arguments in favor of the better tool, and in an open, honest, and transparent manner.

    4. Re:Wrong order by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You've obviously decided which piece of software you want to recommend even though the only reason you can think of to recommend it is that it is FOSS?

      Keep in mind that the blade cuts in both directions. There's this tenancy to paint any FOSS advocate as a zealot and the Proprietary side as "best tool for the job" pragmatists. However, there is zealotry to be found in the proprietary world as well to include strong biases and ignorance towards OSS products. You touched on this with noting "if your boss is actively against FOSS" but I think the point is worth stressing.

    5. Re:Wrong order by brokenin2 · · Score: 2, Funny

      I didn't think they allowed pragmatism here on /. You're going to lose your account man!

    6. Re:Wrong order by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 3, Interesting

      This is right on the mark. As an employee, you're ethically obligated to help the company make the best decision for the company. It's not your place to decide to promote open source for the sake of open source.

      There are a lot - a lot - of people who feel that Free Software is inherently superior to its proprietary cousins, and those people believe they're helping their company by advocating it.

      Whether you agree with them is a different issue, of course. That doesn't change the fact that they're acting in their employer's best interests from their perspective.

      Personally, after spending the last several years trying to help my company pry itself loose from the proprietary EOLed products it depends on, I'm very sympathetic to the idea that Free Software is inherently better. Unless a proprietary product is clearly, unarguably better suited to our needs, I'll support the Free alternative every time. From experience, I know which one will be easier to support (or migrate cleanly away from) 5 years down the road.

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    7. Re:Wrong order by AmberBlackCat · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I installed OpenOffice at a church. The large chemically unbalanced woman, who was in charge of the computer, threw some kind of fit about how it was different from Microsoft Office. The head of the church gave me a talk about how we were getting something free instead of getting what was best. I went on about how there were things Microsoft Office did that OpenOffice didn't, but no one in the church was using Microsoft Office for those things, or even aware of those things. That didn't help. Finally, one of the trustees was also a high level employee at a local enterprise. He used his company discount to get them a new copy of Microsoft Office for $140 and gave me a talk about how much money they saved. They all gave themselves a great big pat on the back.

    8. Re:Wrong order by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Excellent work on your part. You installed your preferred software on someone else's machine without giving any consideration to the experience of the person who will be using it. Often times, when two competing products are both viable solutions, one is chosen simply because the user is already familiar with it. This can lead to a significant improvement in productivity by reducing or eliminating the learning period, which, in the end, can save far more than the cost of the software.

      But you can continue to pat *yourself* on the back for being self-centered over a lousy $140.

  7. A good choice by king+neckbeard · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Protection against lock-in is something employers understand the value of.

    --
    This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    1. Re:A good choice by cptdondo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No they don't. We use a proprietary, closed source "ticket management system" for lack of a better word. This thing is horrid; it has no recordkeeping, no search to speak of, no customization.... I could go on. We also have no direct access to the database; all we can get is a CD of what are essentially static pages of a particular issue.

      It's also pretty close to being abandoned. No new licenses are sold and no new features are being added; the whole thing is in maintenance mode.

      They jumped the subcription about 6 fold last year. I argued strenuously for something like RT, even worked out the cost of adding our needed features - 1/10 of the cost of the annual subscription of the proprietary product.

      No dice. Not windows based, not supported by a major vendor, not approved by MS.

      They're back to evaluating other, closed source, proprietary, locked in systems. So basically some people never learn.

      I washed my hands of the whole deal when I was told "That's not how we do enterprise" as a response to my suggestion to use FOSS.

    2. Re:A good choice by bhcompy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      After working for a decade in tech support, the best "ticket management system" (aka CRM) I've seen is Clarify. Closed source, but leagues better than anything else closed, OSS, or other(and I've used Goldmine, SalesLogix, and others). There is nothing wrong with closed source if it's just better.

  8. Count the minutes till the collapse by stimpleton · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I speak only from my works own dynamics - If opensource software was to appear on work machines(lets say an open office variant) it would last as long as one of our managers receiving a docx from some outside manager with fancy things(annotations, drawings) and the ensuing discussions as they work out they are not looking at the same thing. The manifestation for me it the manager would turn up at my desk with his "look of death" and the question would begin "Can you tell me why...." Been there, done that. The whole thing falls like a deck of cards.

    --

    In post Patriot Act America, the library books scan you.
    1. Re:Count the minutes till the collapse by seebs · · Score: 3, Informative

      That would be a totally coherent or relevant comment in an alternate universe where the question had to do with a replacement for MS Word. Please tell us how you get to that universe, so we can loot their alternate technology to improve our own.

      In short, "let's say an open office variant" is a pure non-sequitur, because "competition for MS Word" is a field where compatibility is widely imagined to be important. (Note: I've had a lot of trouble with compatibility between MS Word and MS Word -- in fact, more than I've had between MS Word and OpenOffice.) We're talking about a tool for internal use, at which point, all that matters is its compatibility with itself -- it's not something that other people send you stuff for. And, even if it were, the chances that the commercial one is an effective monopoly aren't high.

      MS Word is really a very special case, and no example based on it is likely to be relevant to other cases.

      FWIW, we use Foswiki at work these days, I think, and we're pretty happy with it. Search is sorta frustrating, though -- it really does need someone keeping it maintained.

      --
      My blog: http://www.seebs.net/log/ --- My iPhone/iPad app: http://www.seebs.net/seebsfrac/
  9. FLOSS weekly 137 by keith_nt4 · · Score: 5, Informative

    I haven't used either system but the podcast FLOSS weekly recently did a whole episode about PLONE that may help you decide if it is right you.

    --
    "UNIX is very simple, it just needs a genius to understand its simplicity." -Dennis Ritchie
  10. Confluence by C_Kode · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Confluence integrates with Jira. I like and can't argue against it.

    I've never used Plone, but as the old cliché goes, best tool for the job.

    1. Re:Confluence by Zero1za · · Score: 4, Informative

      Also, strictly speaking, Confluence IS open source, it's just not FOSS. You get access to the source code with your license, and as long as you keep your license up to date, you can download the source for the latest version at any time. If at some point you decide not to pay for support, their license allows you to keep working with what you have, binary or source. I think Atlassian as a company have taken a very enlightened approach to this issue, and I have no qualms in paying for their excellent software. Most of the issues I would have with closed source proprietary solutions are not an issue. You are free to tinker, just not redistribute, and they give you the insurance policy, in source code, that you can keep going should there ever be an issue with them as a company.

  11. Confluence is Open Source by MeanMF · · Score: 5, Informative

    Atlassian makes the source for all of their products available to anybody who buys a license. It doesn't cost anything extra, and even the $10 starter licenses come with full source.

    1. Re:Confluence is Open Source by Kalriath · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well, the source is open to you, therefore it is open source. Nothing else matters.

      --
      For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
  12. I think you're looking at this backwards by apdyck · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Perhaps the question you should be asking is, cost aside, which would better suit your needs? Sure FOSS is great but if there is a better fit for your needs and someone else is going to foot the bill, who are you to say that management is looking in the wrong direction? I, for one, believe that there is a place for both commercial and FOSS in the business (and in the home for that matter). Perhaps a cost-benefit analysis needs to be done. Ultimately the decision needs to suit the needs of the business and not the ideals of the employees.

    --
    .sig
  13. do you want a CMS, or a wiki? by WhiteDragon · · Score: 4, Informative

    Plone is a CMS, Confluence is a wiki. Incedentally, both products are quite good. I used Confluence at a previous job and it is a very nice wiki. We used it because of it's tight integration with Jira, an issue tracking system by the same software vendor.

    --
    Did you mount a military-grade, variable-focus MASER on an unlicensed artificial intelligence?
  14. FSF has a great page of testimonies by ciaran_o_riordan · · Score: 3, Informative

    This gets much less attention than it deserves:

    http://www.fsf.org/working-together/whos-using-free-software

    Testimonies from Cern, NYSE, the EU, Wikipedia, and the US Department of Defense, plus another page of testimonies from individuals:

    http://www.fsf.org/working-together/profiles/meet-the-free-software-community

  15. K.I.S.S of death by drsmack1 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Keep it simple stupid - there is the old saying that no one ever got fired for buying Microsoft.

    What never gets added is that people have gotten fired for going above and beyond to advocate for FOSS and then got fired when there was a show-stopping problem (which can happen no matter what new scheme you bring in).

    FOSS has it's time and place, but *you* sticking your neck out trying to jam in FOSS into an environment that is not culturally ready for it is just asking for being the center of a CYA shitstorm.

    I'm guessing that a bunch of people on slashdot have been severely stung from drinking the kool-aid. It hurts the company, the boob that was a advocate instead of a advisor, and most of all it hurts FOSS.

    Don't push, FOSS will get there on it's own schedule.

  16. First, drop the bias by grasshoppa · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If you want to make a solid business case, you need to approach it objectively; what option will cost the least, in the short, medium and long term?

    Maybe it's OSS, maybe it's not. But drop your bias right now before you research associated costs.

    --
    Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
  17. Errr.... by kaffiene · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Actually, I'd go with Confluence. It's not OSS, but it's and awesome Wiki. Choose what's the best tool for the job, not what suits your religion.

  18. Confluence is better by abigor · · Score: 2, Interesting

    1. Written in Java, which means you're more likely to have on-site language expertise in case something goes seriously awry (you get the source when you buy a license).

    2. Lots of support available, as it's the most popular enterprise wiki system.

    3. Integrates with SharePoint, which for many places is a must-have.

    Basically, Atlassian focuses on the enterprise market, and it shows. Best tool for the job, etc.

  19. Re:Cost? by PCM2 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    That might be true, but in my experience the "support" you get from commercial CMS vendors is pretty much worthless. So if we assume that the FOSS support is equally worthless, at the very least FOSS gives you the advantage that you don't have to go through the vendor if there are bugs or other tweaks you want made.

    --
    Breakfast served all day!
  20. MediaWiki? by pak9rabid · · Score: 2

    We use Confluence at work (as well as a bunch of other tools from Atlassian). It's ok, but it's search functionality has much to be desired (at least it's not as bad as JIRA's search functionality). What's wrong with using MediaWiki (the engine behind Wikipedia)?

  21. Re:Cost? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Depending on corporate culture(and the exact policies RE: demos of the proprietary vendor) cost can actually be a huge factor; but not for the obvious "cheap=better" reason.

    In some institutional cultures there is a surprising power(assuming you don't step on the wrong toes) in Just Fucking Doing It. Obviously, unless you have really impressive guts and not too much sense, this doesn't mean putting a production server on an internet facing IP and hacking the company's DNS records to point to it; but showing up with a solid, functioning demo that everyone can gather around the projector and poke around at on their laptops can really sell something.

    If a proprietary product isn't either available as a free demo version, and not through some subscription program you have to sign up for, or so expensive that the company will send a guy in a nice suit to do the demo, hand out some swag, and give everyone a really nice handshake, doing that with a proprietary product is hard and/or illegal.

    Doing it with a FOSS(or freeware, admittedly) product is easy. You just throw something together in a VM and show it off.

    That was my experience when I was trying to convince my employer to drop sharepoint for a wiki. They weren't turned off by the cost of sharepoint; but the fact that I was able to ask my boss for some time at one of our department meetings, get behind the projector and say "Hey, I threw this demo together in a weekend and put in some example content so you can get an idea of how we would use it. Easy web interface, versioning, strong ability to create links between otherwise disparate pieces of technical knowledge, check it out at $INTERNAL_IP..." Everyone pulled out their laptops, poked around a bit, there was some discussion, and the boss green-lighted it.

    Had I given a speech about how we had to, like, fight the proprietary power, man, it would have gone nowhere. However, being able to just sit down, turn on, and show off, all without any serious backing or funding(because everything was free) allowed me to go from "nothing" to "green light-full production status". "Free" never entered into it in a hard financial way. However, had it not been free, I couldn't have done what I did. Now, Anecdote doesn't equal data, much less proof; but it is something to consider.

  22. Re:Cost? by FoolishOwl · · Score: 2, Informative

    Mod parent up!

    This strikes me as genuinely useful advice.

  23. Re:Feature Comparison by shmlco · · Score: 3, Interesting

    First, simply walking down a checklist tells you nothing about how WELL those features are implemented.

    Second, it appears that the Confluence entry is only about 58% complete. Thus, many of the comparisons made assume that Plone wins by default.

    --
    Any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.
  24. Convincing Your Employer To Go With Plone? by rtechie · · Score: 2, Informative

    Your real question is:

    Convincing Your Employer To Go With Plone?

    The answer to this depends on how good your organization is with Zope/Python. If you have onsite developers with Zope knowledge (who can support Plone), Plone is a no-brainer. And if you have developers familiar with other OOS software like Java, you have plenty of other products to choose from:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_source_content_management_systems
    http://www.cmsmatrix.org/

    If you don't have any onsite development staff, the value proposition of OSS/Plone goes down because you will presumably have to hire someone to run it.

    Frankly, that's what I would stress. If this is a large enough project you're going to have to hire someone to run it anyway. You can save on software costs by hiring someone who knows Plone.

    If you're not hiring new staff it boils down to who within your organization is running the CMS and what THEY want. Most other considerations are relatively trivial. The more "out of the box" they need the software to be, the more that leans towards a proprietary solution. They might also want to be able to have a vendor to complain to and to provide direct support, again, proprietary has an edge here.

    Popularity also factors in. I don't really know how popular Plone is, but Confluence is really popular. That means there will be lots of online resources (forums, FAQs, etc.) for Confluence that you might not find for Plone.

  25. Re:Cost? by dch24 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Check out Confluence -- apparently it works ok.

  26. Re:Cost? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Unfortunately, I can't help you there. We were rather underutilizing the sharepoint setup, as little more than a glorified shared drive, only with more annoying complexity.

    That, combined with the fact that virtually all the document production of the department is lightly formatted near-plaintext technical documentation, with the occasional screenshot and hyperlink, also had a lot to do with making the pitch successful. Had we been 100% behind sharepoint at the time, it almost certainly would have failed. However, since we weren't putting too much effort into gettting the most out of any document management setup, I was able to sell the wiki(ended up being dokuwiki, I think) as a great "80/20 solution". Sharepoint would give you more features(and I freely acknowledged that); but required a greater level of work and buy-in than the department was giving it. The wiki would give us 80ish% of the benefits for 20% of the effort.

    So far, that has been largely true. For a department of our size, the wiki lives on a tiny little VM, not consuming any CALs or licences or anything, gives us versioning and attribution for the mostly plaintext documentation/links/screenshots stuff, and supports links to an SMB share where we can store installers and documents that absolutely have to be in Word, and so forth.

    Not quite as seamless; but it was fast, easy, and cheap. The fact that I could go from "nothing" to "full demo" in a little bit of spare time just helped drive that home.

  27. Re:Cost? by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Tits.

    Seriously. Thats all you need to do. Hire a stripper and write Plone across her tits. Show it to your boss.

    You don't understand business if you try logic and reason.

  28. Re:how WRONG can you get about "open source"? by Kalriath · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Actually, it is YOU who should go invent your own phrase, and YOU who is wrong. Open has a clearly defined meaning in English, and the OSI and FSF have no mandate to redefine the language. What you refer to is more adequately called Free Libre Open Source Software (FLOSS) because it doesn't try to redefine the common vernacular.

    --
    For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
  29. Go-oo.org by Fencepost · · Score: 2, Informative

    Go-oo.org is a fork managed by some folks at Novell that incorporates multiple patches that haven't made it into the main branch yet. One of those is exceeding 65K rows (now 1048576). It's not in the main branch because there are apparently some problems with calculation performance with many rows and some problems with positioning with drawing objects. More details in http://kohei.us/2010/02/20/increasing-calcs-row-limit-to-1-million/

    --
    fencepost
    just a little off
  30. Two words: Vendor lockin by syousef · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Point out that the vendor can and will kill off a product and support for that product OR charge like a wounded bull for specialised support OR that the company may fold, and that they are not legally obligated to continue a product that the company may become dependent up. Then point out that in the case of open source, it is possible to hire someone to develop the product further and support it, and that even if there is a cost penalty it won't be extortionate.

    All other arguments are a waste of time for mission critical applications. Open source may or may not be cheaper.

    --
    These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
  31. Re:Cost? by Derkec · · Score: 2, Informative

    It's definitely not cost.

    In Corporate IT budget terms, Confluence is free. A manager can purchase a couple hundred users worth of licenses on the corporate credit card. And it's supported. Hell, that's pretty much the Atlassian model. Stack 'em high, sell 'em cheap, and make 'em pretty.

    I think the parent is dead on. If you have your heart set on plone (I've used it, it's acceptable - won't bring many tears of sorrow or joy) the parent is right. Just do it. If asked to compare to confluence, you want to find some practical reason Confluence is worse - some security thing would be ideal - but end up with a "look, this is easy, it's done, and it's free" kind of play. "We could do Confluence, but it does cost some money and it's pretty much the same thing. I don't see a compelling reason to pay for it."

    However, if your boss really values support (a "throat to choke") you'll want to know what it'll cost to pay someone to provide you a Plone support contract. Plone.net has some providers listed. In the US, I'd start with http://www.enfoldsystems.com/ .

  32. Re:Cost? by pionzypher · · Score: 2, Interesting

    More anecdote, but a very similar result at my current employer. FOSS was accepted by quietly proving itself in a small corner of a quiet department. Dokuwiki, then LAPP. Now the higher ups are inquiring on savings for building a FOSS based cms for company wide use instead of server 2k8/sharepoint. Grass roots.

    --
    I'll believe in corporations having personhood when Texas executes one... - advocate_one