Open Source FUD Flies at Florida Higher Education Conference

by Sam Dean - Oct. 31, 2008Comments (8)

The New York Times is running an interesting piece from IDG News on how administrators and IT chiefs for higher educational institutions are at odds over whether it makes sense to deploy open source software instead of proprietary products. The flap went on this week at the Educause conference in Florida. Within the argument that's going on, a number of surprising fallacies about open source are apparently cropping up. Here are the details.

Ask many folks in the open source world why it makes sense to deploy open source software in schools, and a lot of them will say that cash-strapped schools can save money by doing so. We've argued this before many times, including here, here, and here.

The New York Times quotes Adrian Sannier, university technology officer and professor of computing studies at Arizona State University, speaking at Educause. He argues that cost savings will be consumed by the consulting fees paid to deploy "community-source enterprise applications." "The consultants who help you are like bartenders serving drunks," he's quoted as saying.

This issue, and tangential ones, are often raised when school administrators argue against open source. Along with this purported problem regarding hidden costs, many school administrators argue that open source licensing issues are too prickly and complex. Kristin tackled some of these issues well in this post. She writes:

"The sticking points that are almost inevitably raised are the previously mentioned customer support issues, the ultimate scalability of the software, the learning curve required (for the systems staff, but moreso the faculty and students), and how difficult the software is to maintain and administer."

I've worked at large companies where one single, talented and well-informed IT person can support the varying technology needs of 500 people, including providing support for open source software. With the huge cost savings that educational institutions can reap from deploying open source software, I see no reason why a team of these types of IT managers couldn't be hired, couldn't learn the open source solutions they deploy from end-to-end, and couldn't support students and staff completely. Even with a team, the cost savings would be substantial. As far as licenses go, businesses all over the world are deftly deploying open source while staying in compliance with licenses. There is no reason the eggheads at schools can't do so as well.

As I've written before, the larger problem here is one of entrenched views and prejudices. When school administrators and IT people think of technology deployments, they lean heavily toward Macintosh hardware, and established moat-building commercial applications such as Blackboard.

Even the providers of these solutions protect their moats aggressively. Apple does so with its marketing to schools, and Blackboard drew a heaping helping of nasty criticism for its over-the-top patents, and lawsuits regarding parts of its learning management system that many people feel belong to the open source community. This is an area where open source evangelists need to educate the educators.

 


Browse Blog

Shailesh Patel uses OStatic to support Open Source, ask and answer questions and stay informed. What about you?



8 Comments
 

As if the paid support for conventionally licensed software, which often gets one what can be described as "no effective support", how much worse can it be?


I bet the students would be glad to participate in training for volunteer support roles that would translate to real, economically viable skills after graduation.


0 Votes

Excellent point Alan. It would be in true open source spirit to leverage the students for support, and they would have unusual, good skill sets upon graduation.


0 Votes

In my experience, I've been screwed worse by consultants "helping" us deploy proprietary software than by open source consultants. Granted, the open source consultants I've dealt with are generally ones that are primary developers on the project for which they offer consulting services (examples include Symas for OpenLDAP support and Reductive Labs for Puppet support).


Red Hat, on the other hand, has sent very poor consultants, as have VMWare and Xerox, to name a few. Ever try deploying Peoplesoft without involving contracting to very expensive consultants with marginal talents?


0 Votes

You have pain in both the camps. There are good companies and there are bad companies. My recommendation is to establish a good relationship with a local service provide who knows what they are doing and get their support, regardless of Open or Closed.


0 Votes

My company is in the business of support for open source for education, but I find that schools tend to be quite pragmatic. If you do find a school that has gone open source, it's usually due to an energetic and capable person who has been able to move beyond the FUD.


Regrettably, I'm having to do more support for businesses and more spin towards proprietary software (Microsoft) because that's where the money is. Hopefully, one day people will understand open source.


0 Votes

Your experience will always be better if you have a technically knowledgeable staff member involved in the process. Reliance on outside consultants is fine, but you need someone from your team to ask intelligent questions and cut through any technical BS. The money spent on an in-house expert won't be wasted.


It's kinda like owning a car. The guy at the service shop may know what he's doing or he may be trying to oversell you or rip you off. The more you know about how your car works, the more likely you are to get a fair deal on repairs.


0 Votes

Your experience will always be better if you have a technically knowledgeable staff member involved in the process. Reliance on outside consultants is fine, but you need someone from your team to ask intelligent questions and cut through any technical BS. The money spent on an in-house expert won't be wasted.


It's kinda like owning a car. The guy at the service shop may know what he's doing or he may be trying to oversell you or rip you off. The more you know about how your car works, the more likely you are to get a fair deal on repairs.


0 Votes

"entrenched views and prejudices." Are the main reasons but you forgot to mention that many shools IT administrator are afraid of FOSS because of their lack of knowledge of these far superior technologies. They acknoledge their ignorance by shutting down the door to FOSS and looking down to it. The higher departments are also reluctant to migrate in spite the advantages because there's a lot of lobbyism and pressures from propietary companies. For example licenses for MS office costs to K12 schools between $40-50 per client. Microsoft doesn't care because when those kids grow up, they will be hooked up to its produces. When you mention to them the alternatives, they just look in disbelief and most of them do nothing to free themselves. Teachers telling students you MUST have this to learn at home. How can I ask a student to pay $400 for MS Office suite when their parents are living with minimal income? It's ludicrous how the system perpetrates itself. As Mattew mentioned we do need more of those "energetic and capable person who has been able to move beyond the FUD." We do also need to keep on doing the grass-roots work. This morning a teacher asked me what should I do to protect my home computer at home? Protect me from viruses, worms and spyware? I'm spending a lot of money but still not sure? I answered him: "Dump any propietary software and switch for good to FOSS" He'll do as well as many I can help to do so. The word will spread and next time they'll buy a computer, they'll getting with Ubuntu. Nice article, keep the good work!


0 Votes
Share Your Comments

If you are a member, to have your comment attributed to you. If you are not yet a member, Join OStatic and help the Open Source community by sharing your thoughts, answering user questions and providing reviews and alternatives for projects.