Open Source - Is it really value for money?

gallery

How many times do you read that free software, in the long run, costs money? Is that even true? This was one of many questions addressed by the European Open Source Convention organised by O'Reilly Media in Brussels last week.

Traditionally, closed source applications and operating systems (for example Microsoft's Windows XP and soon to be released Windows Vista) has been the only route to purchase software systems for large companies. One company writes the code, sells it, supports it, updates it, and keeps it secure. But putting all your eggs in one basket is no longer the only option. Open source applications such as the Firefox web browser and the Linux based Ubuntu operating system are generally considered to be ready for use by the non-technical consumer.

So why should going down the route of open source be something that every organisation should consider?

First of all, there is the financial argument - there is no initial cost in getting started, and with a large user base of people feeding back information, the applications tend to be more stable - and of course if a problem occurs you are not restricted to going through a single company for all your support issues, although as with any competitive industry not all open source support companies are equal.

Some of the major open source projects are co-ordinated by single for-profit firms. MySQL is a prime example. MySQL is a multithreaded and multi-user SQL database management system, available freely. MySQL make their profit in charging for support calls, with a promised 30 minute response time - but there is a huge user base so you have multiple sources to find help on the internet, from the MySQL hosted forums and mailing lists, to IRC channels and other support networks. Even a quick search through Google (which itself uses MySQL to power their AdWords service) will show a wealth of information available online.

So you are not tied to one monopolistic support contract - there is a capitalist market to choose from. Naturally the more popular open source applications will have more to choose from, but the simple benefit of being able to look at the source code yourself means that, in theory, you could simply hire a competent programming team and tweak the application to your own needs.

Open Source - not a guarantee

What is important to stress here is just because an application is open source isn't a 100 per cent guarantee that your data is going to be transportable. For that you'll need to make sure that the application uses an open standard (the format the data is saved in is specified and anyone can use it). The OpenOffice.org suite of apps for example use the Open Document Format, which is available on the web for other office applications to use. So if you do decide to switch away from Open Office, you'll be able to take all your documents with you. Contrast that to an open source application where no other application uses their format.

Open source still requires the same investigation and assessment as closed source - but everything should be in plain sight, so you can make a genuine decision with all the information. One benefit may be that, if a project decides to stop, holding the source code means you are not left high and dry - contrast this to what would happen in your company if, for example, Microsoft decided to withdraw support for Exchange.

Email to a friend

Print this page