Open Source Software in Business and Government

I have read some emails sent between government workers recently and have been lead to the conclusion that we need a higher degree of awareness of open source software alternatives in government agencies and businesses.

Many, upon hearing about open source software make comments about how nothing is free, or how software made by people in their spare time cannot be as good as software made by companies that dedicate all of their resources to making good software. First, while everything good requires work from someone, people often choose to give service at no charge. Consider charities for a good example of this. Open source software is like a charity, only better, since the work of one person can benefit everyone willing to take advantage of it. Second, most software companies have a limited amount of personnel to program and test software, while open source software can be programmed, tested, and reviewed by anyone with a decent computer.

One thing people do not realize about software companies is that their goal is not to make good high quality software; their goal is to make as much profit as possible (they are legally required to maximize profits for their shareholders). This means making software that is just sufficient to make people willing to buy it at the price being charged. This means that a bug that will not effect most users will probably be ignored unless it is really easy to fix. This also means there will only be enough features to make it sufficiently more useful (or flashy) to make consumers want it over competitors software.

Another major problem with proprietary software in government is that software companies usually use proprietary formats for saving data, so that customers will be forced to continue to use their software instead of switching to a competitor's product. The problem with this in government (as noted in several of the emails) is that most government data is legally required to be retained in a publicly readable form, permanently. This means that if I do not own the proprietary software used to record the data, it is not readable to me, a member of the public. In addition, if future versions of the software remove support for that specific proprietary format (this is a very common technique used to force consumers to upgrade to a newer version), and old versions are no longer licensable (ie, the company stops selling the older version), the data is no longer readable by anyone who did not buy the software when it was on the market. Essentially this means that it is actually technically illegal for government organizations to store any data solely in proprietary formats, because the data cannot be considered permanently available to the public.

Businesses should also consider this. Once again, there are records that businesses are required to keep that must be in a presentable form for government inspections or audits. If the business changes its software to something that does not support the old software's format, the business could be in deep legal trouble if they get audited. The government officials do not care if the company changed its software, they want to see the records and if the company cannot produce them in a format that is readable, the company is going to get fined, or worse.

Using open source data formats can alleviate these problems. Among other things, most open source software still supports the original data formats it originally used, even if it normally uses a newer format now. Besides that, if your records are stored in an open format, even if the software that can open it no longer exists, you can find the original formating information and construct a simple program to display the data or convert it to a newer format.

These are the purely technical reasons for using open source software as opposed to proprietary software. Following are some less technical, but just as important reasons for using open source software.

Earlier I debunked the myth that software companies have more reasons and resources for making high quality software. Here you will find why open source software is often considered much better than proprietary software. Most people that are working on open source software are not getting paid for it (some companies do pay some of their programmers to help work on specific open source projects). This means that their incentive for making the software is not to earn a paycheck. Most people working on open source software are doing it because they intend on using the software and they have a specific interest in its functionality. This means that they actually want the software to work properly. If you research open source software you will find many projects that claim they are not suitable for commercial use at this point. If you use these programs you may also find that they work as well or better than many programs sold by software companies as commercial products for commercial use. The reason open source software is often superior to proprietary software is specifically that those making it aren't being paid to make it. Also, as I mentioned earlier, since anyone with a decent computer can test it, bugs are weeded out much more quickly and efficiently, and frequently new features are added as suggested by those using the software (or even added by those using the software).

Finally, one of the best reasons to seriously consider using open source software in government and business is that it is usually free. Anything that can replace a high cost commodity in government or business at no cost should be seriously considered. I have seen arguments over availability of documentation, training, tech support, and other things as reasons for avoiding open source software, but a few Google searches will quickly reveal that the community of open source software users are far more friendly for sharing information than anyone using proprietary software. Some open source software may not include as good documentation as some proprietary software, but free technical support is far more available on the internet for open source software (and you don't have to spend hours on hold waiting to talk to some guy in India who doesn't even understand english).

Switching to open source software can save large organizations enormous amounts of money. The last time I checked, Microsoft Office cost $160, if you have to buy Office for 200 computers (not unusual for large companies), that is costing you $32,000. This is just one piece of software. Adobe Photoshop CS4 costs almost $700, Adobe Illustrator CS4 costs over $300, and Adobe InDesign cost from $250 to $300. A graphic design studio could save $1,250 or more per computer using The GIMP, Inkscape, and Scribus, free open source alternatives to the proprietary programs I have mentioned above. Businesses may be able to negotiate lower prices for buying in bulk, but they can't beat free.

I would like to recommend government agencies and businesses to look for open source alternatives to the software they buy large amounts of, or pay large amounts for. If you find alternatives that appear to have any potential, download them and evaluate them. The only costs incured for evaluation are man hours, and with the potential savings, it is well worth the time spent. Just don't forget that any new software is going to have a learning curve. Remember this if, after five minutes, you decide that the software is difficult to use. If it was really that hard to use, would there be enough interest in it for it to be worth the work people are putting into it? Give your evaluators a little time to learn to use the software, then watch them use it and decide if your proprietary software is really worth the licensing costs.

Lord Rybec