Linux and Open Source

Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols & Paula Rooney

The truth about government and open source

By | July 13, 2010, 5:39am PDT

Summary: The new Conservative government in the U.K. is teasing the idea of switching to open source, but for entirely the wrong reason.

The new Conservative government in the U.K. is teasing the idea of switching to open source, but for entirely the wrong reason.

(Shown is Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne, from his parliamentary Web site.)

The claim, supposedly from two government employees, is that the move will save money. In some ways that’s right. But experience teaches a different lesson.

Open source does save a lot of money on the front-end. If you’re not paying license fees, you can say you’re saving money.

But in an enterprise environment that’s only half the story. You need to learn how to get value from open source. Developing with open source means paying developers. And open source requires a different attitude toward your people — all your people — if you’re to gain the most value from it.

I love open source, but a wholesale, immediate switch for an enterprise will always be a fiasco. You’re going to dump people who have knowledge, just because that knowledge involves proprietary products. And you’re going to have to gear up to hire people who have different types of knowledge.

More important, an organization using open source can’t be driven from the top down. The most successful open source implementations are bottom-up affairs. You have to empower people to get into the guts of your organization and support them, even when they make mistakes.

In other words, some of what you save on the front end you lose on the back end. And you have to start trusting your people. Open source won’t work if your people are mushrooms — if you want to leave them in the dark and shovel manure on them.

Another important point is your relationship to the community, which in this case is the whole country. You’re taking software from a commons. You need to donate back. You need to accept the contributions and ideas of complete outsiders, maybe even foreigners, maybe even Americans.

And you have to participate.

These are lessons American enterprises are still learning. Many large American companies that have supported open source projects still aren’t getting full value, because they won’t allow contributions to the commons from employees and they won’t allow free communications with the community.

There’s a lot of change to get your head around, and you have to believe in it.

My advice, based on what I’ve learned on this beat, is it’s best to go slowly. Evolve toward open source. Don’t impose it. And accept the values of open source if you want to get full value from it.

If you can do that you can make lasting change in any organization, even a government.

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

Dana Blankenhorn has been a business journalist for 30 years, a tech freelancer since 1983.

Disclosure

Dana Blankenhorn

Dana Blankenhorn has been a journalist, writer and part-time futurist for over 30 years.

At the present moment I run only a personal blog in addition to my ZDNet open source blog.

DanaBlankenhorn.Com has the subtitle The War Against Oil. In the past I have used it to write about political history, e-commerce, personal matters, some ideas related to open source, and The World of Always On, which is the idea of using sensors, motes and RFID to turn WiFi links into platforms for applications which live in the air.

My IRA account at Schwab holds a few tech shares, most notably some Intel and Applied Materials, but there are no open source companies in it. I don’t even own any CBS stock.

Biography

Dana Blankenhorn

Dana Blankenhorn has been a business journalist for nearly 25 years and has covered the online world professionally since 1985. He founded the Interactive Age Daily for CMP Media, and has written for the Chicago Tribune, Advertising Age's "NetMarketing" supplement, and dozens of other publications over the years.

Talkback Most Recent of 15 Talkback(s)

  • I Would Beg to Differ
    Many companies are now retooling their IT from the Top down. The latest cases in point, Google's banning of MS and MS products and IBM's standardization on Firefox.

    Peugeot had no compunction about going to Linux desktops among many other European companies and government entities.

    The key is to plan, train, and leave room for exceptions (which are becoming fewer and further between). Even our own Federal government and many State and local entities are switching to Open Source.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    rjacksix
    13th Jul 2010
  • RE: The truth about government and open source
    @rjacksix The point here is it's not enough to "switch" software. You also need to learn to share and be part of a community to get the most value from open source.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    DanaBlankenhorn
    13th Jul 2010
  • Go Back to School Dana!
    @DanaBlankenhorn If you've never used commercial Open Source Solutions like Red Hat or SuSE, then don't even talk about it. Because YOU have no idea what you're talking about! grin

    Now holding a 38% of the Corporate and Server side market means they are gaining on MS Windows. You have companies like IBM, Google and Government Agencies like NSA, DOE, DOD now running only Linux. The director of the FBI personally said DON'T USE WINDOWS FOR BANKING!!!

    Majority of Super Computers use Linux and over 96% of HPC CLUSTERS run on Linux!

    Microsoft last year year said they fear Linux over Apple's OS-X. Need proof? Here:
    http://www.osnews.com/story/21035/Ballmer_Lin%20%20%20%20%20ux_Bigger_Competitor_than_Apple

    That's looks to be about 15 to 17%, but that's an estimate. You see it's OEM distribution is very low, but YOU FOOLS keep forgetting that Linux downloaded 95% of the time. One small distro over the last 3yrs has been downloaded 30million times alone and that's peanuts compared to Ubuntu and others. About 200+ distro version as a matter of fact.

    Linux most likely runs your car, the Airline you fly on, the trains you ride on and 100's of commercial uses today. Medical Research uses Linux almost exclusively. Your banks run Linux and the Stocks also run on Linux. Credit Card transactions are taken care of almost exclusively on Linux and I could go on and include Sony PS3's, Routers, Firewalls, cable boxes, Televisions, DVR's, and too many to count devices that aren't included in those M$ estimates! .....why? Because they only just got into things like HPC Clusters and they're not even a blip on the radar yet!
    ZDNet Gravatar
    i2fun@...
    14th Jul 2010
  • The article is right on, I think
    @rjacksix The corporate scene is littered with failed attempts at "cashing in" on open source. Organizational initiatives and decisions may need to come from the top, but only if they've done their homework and have a good base on the ground floor and in the wider community. Your two examples - Google and IBM - are HUGE contributors to open source... and I'll bet their geeky rank and file didn't need much convincing.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    overnout
    13th Jul 2010
  • RE: The truth about government and open source
    truth about about it is bank that website attacked from the site support from any soldier site to the light home page is great government
    ZDNet Gravatar
    musdahi
    16th Sep
  • See the roll-call on most open-source projects.
    Most of those people already hail from Europe and the U.K. Their culture is already much more accepting of OO ways and people.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    Gaius_Maximus
    13th Jul 2010
  • So you love open source...Hmmm.
    how nice.

    Saying that you love open source does not detract from your conscious/unconscious motivations, and they are, to make sure open source is never allowed to be put into an active action plan. Here we are in 2010, this very same regressive attitude towards open source is what has maintained the destructive effects of the present monopoly mafia, vandalizing the software market & open & fair competition up till now.

    It's the same as saying that we should not invest in renewable energy, while taking out patents to prevent open r & d, we are always being held back by greedy $$$ vested interests. In the end, the common person pays the bill, not the Shareholders.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    ricardomardi
    13th Jul 2010
  • RE: The truth about government and open source
    @ricardomardi What? Who/what are you talking to/about?
    ZDNet Gravatar
    overnout
    13th Jul 2010
  • RE: The truth about government and open source
    @overnout ...well...what do you reckon? Look to the top of the page will you? Did you just wake up? Pass some of that stuff this way, it must be good.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    ricardomardi
    13th Jul 2010
  • Reorientation
    While I agree that there is a reorientation to be made toward open source, I do not think that there is such a big change in communication with the community; it is simply a different community.

    When you found a bug or a capability that you needed in Microsoft Word or Excel, what did you do? If you were big enough (ie, UPS, GE, Exxon, etc.), you might have some direct influence on Microsoft Corporation. Short of that, you posted messages and questions on web sites (was BBS systems) and media pundits would take up your case in order to have some material to write about so they could sell advertising. Once the level around an issue rose to an adequate level, Microsoft Corporation would put a line on a project plan and order more Jolt cola. You suffered with the bug or did without the feature until Microsoft released a patch or you had the opportunity to pay for the next version.

    So, what is different about using open source? Well, there is generally not an 800 number to call, but there is no shortage of ways to communicate to the community about the bug identified or capability needed. The media does not follow such issues as closely since there is not any obvious organization to pay them for advertising. More significantly, if the media produced content that aided or abetted users of open source software, the proprietary product vendors would quickly let them know of their displeasure. And their reduced advertising budget for the media outlet.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    pwatson
    13th Jul 2010
  • RE: The truth about government and open source
    It would seem that the more you change at once and the more suddenly you change it then the more exponentially things can go wrong. That could be devastating especially at the government level where it effects many many people and potentially even long term. I think Dana's bottom up suggestion has merit.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    hoctopus2
    13th Jul 2010
  • no test!
    Are you people kidding me? Every environment we have EVER gone into using open source has been flat out blown away by the speed with which we develop on cloed systems, e.g., .NET.

    I just bid on a project last month and came in at 1.5 mos delivery time. Every other bid was in PHP/Java and the rest of that opern source riff-raff--average delivery time? 4-6 mos, with nobody else coming close.

    So spare me! Business wants quality, maintainability, scalability and they want it NOW!! When you look at open source vs. closed source systems (esp. Objective C) you see there is no test because the support is precisely the difference! That is to say-- relying on the producer of a product rather than "hoping" someone in the community might post an answer or response to a forum on a web site is a much better way to go!
    ZDNet Gravatar
    kckn4fun
    14th Jul 2010
  • no comparison
    @kckn4fun - If you had the proficiency with PHP/Java that you do with .NET, you would probably be able to deliver just as quickly for your clients.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    pwatson
    14th Jul 2010
  • RE: The truth about government and open source
    I am no expert in open and closed sources, programing language, communities, etc. - but I am in government and one of the biggest concerns is (or should be) security.
    1) Is open source really as secure as closed systems, or does it seem more secure because many of the hackers play with what a majority of the average Joe's use?
    2) Is not open source.. well...open? If you are waiting on the general community to solve your problem, isn't it because everyone has the source codes to help you fix the problem? If they have the source codes, does it not make things easier to hack? With mention of the FBI, Wall Street banking, etc. using open source I might be off base on this, but maybe someone can explain it on simple terms to me. Why would an open source code be safe? If it is just algorithms that are used for security, is that not the same as what closed sources use?
    3) In my years of experience working in government, almost ten, the most difficult thing regarding computers is the lack of IT staff and money for program updates. Only two years ago we stopped using a DOS program developed by a former employee 15 years previous. It is not secure and not even year 2000 compliant (We enter 21 for 2001). We still have to keep this division database and use it because no one seems to know how to transfer the data into some program more recent and the data is important. Knowing this, I am sure you can understand that we don't change IE, Word, Outlook, etc. when new versions are released, not to say the updates. IT has a difficult time just keeping the stations up and functioning. With that in mind, open systems look attractive because the operating systems are free and many of the programs you want already come with the operating system. Of course, even open systems have updates and if government does not do them now, I doubt they will in the future.

    So which, in this type environment, is most secure - an open or closed source system?
    ZDNet Gravatar
    fsz@...
    18th Jul 2010
  • RE: The truth about government and open source
    @fsz@... You seem to think that because source code is not available for Microsoft products that hackers do not know what is inside.

    Not true. There are many dis-assemblers and reverse engineering tools available, some commercially.

    Effective security must be based on something more than knowledge of the code.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    pwatson
    10th Aug 2010

Talkback - Tell Us What You Think

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources