Open source no question. Not to bore you with all the reasons, but I think you will find that over the next 5 years, there will be very few popular software packages that do not have an open source equivalent that is evolving much faster than their closed source cousins.

posted January 17, 2007

Open Source with very few reservations. 1) it's free 2) you can customize it 3) lots of options and alternatives compared to closed source solutions. Open Source is almost a given for web-based apps but still lags behind on the desktop - however, apps like OpenOffice are damn impressive and can certainly be used for real work.

posted January 17, 2007

Depends on what you're trying to do :)

Trust me - I'm a HUGE proponent of open source, but sometimes open source doesnt cut it.

After 5 years of dealing with my debian linux firewall in front of my webservers, I finally got tired of mucking around with iptables to try and get my bandwidth throttling handled. I bought a netscreen 5gt.

But as far as something like - a web server? I dont care if you're a billion dollar corporation, or two guys in a garage selling arts and crafts. Apache.

Apache is vastly superior in every aspect.

If you'd like to strike up a conversation, feel free! I love talking shop!

Links:

• http://www.atensyndicate.com

posted January 17, 2007

I have no personal preference but from a business perspective and utilisation in business scenarios in Financial Services open source just doesn't get on the IT strategy table.

Regards

Chris

posted January 17, 2007

Bruno- I think it all depends on your exact needs. Here are some of the questions I think I'd ask myself and the customer:
Do you really have two equal candidates?
What about the total cost of ownership, everything from software and hardware to support and services included? ROI? sometimes the Open Source is cheaper, sometimes it's more expensive.
What about knowledge inside the organization? Available knowledge and expertise?
implementation? Would it be easy and quick for both?
Support? Consulting? Interfaces to other systems?
I found out there is no general "one size fits all" answer for this question. Some organizations would prefer Open Source, while others take the Closed Source road.

posted January 17, 2007

In many situations, the question between open source and closed source is pointless. Because the fact in a wast majority of cases is if the source is open or not doesn't really have anything to do with either quality or support...

Many people think that open source == download from the internett
Closed source == buy from a vendor.

But what about Red Hat, IBM, Novell/Suse, HP and such. All of them sell solutionbased systems with support, consulting and everything - and it is open source.

This discussion isn't about open or closed anymore - it is about you wanting to buy software, or download free versions without direct support.

And, are you willing to actually do what the license for open source asks of you? Are you willing to share your adjustments and custom code you wrote to get it to work at your place? Or do you just want to leech on the fact that others has done that, and made the code into the quality product you wanted?

posted January 17, 2007

If the closed source version means that you will be locked in, try to avoid it. However, it might have more features than an open source alternative. Try to get your hand on an evalutaion version before buying any closed source apps. See if it fits the job now, and if it will fit in the future. Do not rely on promises of new features in version x.y.z to be released in due time.

I prefer to use open source apps, the reason being that I have a better chance that some feature that's missing will be added. If nobody is willing to do it, I could do it myself. Or have any other developer do it, if it's really a requirement in the future. No such luck with closed apps. Also, I think that a lot of open source apps have a better chance of offering interoperability, and if they do not, you stand a good chance of being able to get your data out.

Do the people in your organisation have any experience with the open source version/product? Do they need to be educated about it prior to deployment? Do they understand why you're choosing this product? What about support? Can it be purchased? Is there a large community around this product that can help you out?

posted January 18, 2007

Sometimes mixed approaches work better; I used to work as a consultant creating .NET applications for pure closed source clients, for whom no open source code was to be included in the final product... but we developed the application using several open source tools that MS did not provide at the time (NUnit, NAnt, Cruise Control.NET, etc); I think that both approaches complement each other. They have their relative strengths and weaknesses.

But if I have to choose, I will always give preference to open source tools first, and then, and only if I do not find what I'm looking for, use a closed source solution (one that does not lock me in, though).

Best regards,

Adrian

posted January 18, 2007

Definitely OSS but only with commercial support from large companies.
I just have to be sure that there is a proper QA on the code.

posted January 18, 2007

Open Source!

with Open Source, you have all the ingredients including how-tos to make a good dish. whereas with closed source, u have only how-tos.

posted January 18, 2007

Open source is definitely a factor to consider as part of a comprehensive needs assessment. What are you/your client attempting to achieve?
What does their environment already contain?
What impact from a user/maintenance standpoint?
Is there in house expertise to support it?
Does the product meet all the business requirements?
What are the support costs?
Etc.

Any mature implementation plan will treat the licensing requirements - closed or open – as one part of the selection criteria. Once we step back from the closed/open debate and look at licensing in general then the specific clauses in each license matter? Not all closed source licenses are the same, not all open source licenses are the same. Each specific license has requirements and limitations imposed on you – it is these limitations and impositions that must be weighed. Not the Closed/Open label.

posted January 18, 2007

Shouldn't the answer be that you should select the best product for your needs first and then decide if you might want to use an open source product? I only care if it works, is well maintained, has low tco and is easy to manage. I don't care that open source can be customized, that just introduces more bugs. I don't care if company A is very big, it doesn't mean their producst are any good

posted January 18, 2007

All things being equal between any given closed and open source application that do the same task, I will prefer (and recommend) open source.

All things are never equal though, so it's always a case-by-case decision.

posted January 18, 2007

For some inexplicable reason, my company is throwing its money at closed source solutions such as .NET and Oracle. It seems that paying extortionate license fees to Microsoft and other vendors are OK, but reimbursing me for mileage to attend a conference 100 miles away is out of the question. </sour-grapes>

I, and a number of my colleagues, are huge open source fans for all the reasons mentioned already by others in this thread and more. I believe that, media FUD to the contrary, OSS is more secure, has significantly lower TCO, and offers greater opportunities for career growth for technical folks.

posted January 18, 2007