Beyond the Code
or, how to win friends, influence people and make a living by writing open source software. It's not just about the code.
Follow me on Twitter as @jonobennett.
Monday 26 October 2009, 5:04 PM
CIO Jury returns the wrong verdict on open source
The first mistake the jury has made is blame any migration costs on the software you're moving to, not from. While any software migration will use up resources, this is as true of moving from one version of a proprietary package to another, as it is of moving from proprietary to open source. In bringing this argument up, the jury is admitting they've been caught by the proprietary software trap — exit costs.
Open source has no exit costs, because you never need to make an exit. As long as you have the source, you can fix bugs and adapt the software to your needs, or you can pay someone else to do it for you. If you don't like the service you're getting, you can go elsewhere. If only one company is allowed to make changes to the software you're using, and you don't think they're providing value for money, you're trapped.
The other mistake the jury makes is to think that even if there are no immediate cash savings to be had, open source isn't a better investment in the longer term. You can get discounts on proprietary software licences, but you'll still have to pay, and you'll have to do it more than once. When you spend money on open source software, you get to keep the results, so you're not just paying to use something that will be deliberately obsoleted in a few years, forcing you to pay for an upgrade.
Open source software isn't an instant fix that will instantly make more cash available in your company, but it will save you money, and it will make the money you do spend go further. It also makes you free to make your own decisions about suppliers. That's what will deliver real long-term savings.
Comments on this post
How can they not see the longer term savings :s, well either that or they have being bought off. :O


