[AktiviX-discuss] Ufi-learndirect: what should I say?

Drew Whitworth drew at comp.leeds.ac.uk
Fri Jun 10 14:49:52 UTC 2005


Is the only issue one of Open Source v Proprietary?

Of course it's an issue but it's not the only one. If Dan was looking for
ways to convince his friend to "spend Government money" in "progressive"
ways, why not convince her to try and stop training people to be, as he put
it, "office monkeys", and try encouraging them to learn some things like: 
- the historical, political and economic drivers behind IT
- how to write accessible, quality web sites without using proprietary
tools, and on one's own behalf, about whatever political/social issue or
local campaign one wants to support
- how to find high quality information online, regardless of the gatekeeping
and commercialism desperate to get in the way
- the background to important but woefully underdebated policy issues like
software patents, censorship, the clampdowns on file sharing, ID cards and,
indeed, the "University for Industry" (a phrase which makes me shudder each
time I read it)

In other words, teach them information literacy, not information technology.


All this would be just as important, and probably more accessible to Dan's
friend.

Drew


-----Original Message-----
From: aktivix-discuss-bounces at lists.aktivix.org
[mailto:aktivix-discuss-bounces at lists.aktivix.org] On Behalf Of Alan Dawson
Sent: Friday, June 10, 2005 8:24 AM
To: aktivix-discuss at lists.aktivix.org
Subject: Re: [AktiviX-discuss] Ufi-learndirect: what should I say?

Quoting chip <chiapas at riseup.net>:

> hi
> 
> Dan said:
> 
> [...]
> 
> > Thus - I'm looking for some suggestions. If I want to 'lobby' her - to
> > convince her of how huge amounts of government money, via learndirect,
> > should be better spent if one considers oneself to be socialist, or
> > vaguely progressive... what should I say?
> 
> you could point her towards a recent Government study into the use of Open
> Source Software in Education published today on the BECTA website at:
> 
> http://www.becta.org.uk/corporate/press_out.cfm?id=4681
> 

We were recently discussing this report at my day job where it has some
relevance...  Below are the  comments one of colleagues made. 

> Sent: 06 June 2005 16:45
> To: Dawson, Alan
> Subject: OSS in Schools Report
>
>
> Comments:
>
> Appendix 3 is fatally flawed!  One of the aims of the study
> was to "compare the TCO of using OSS... against that of
> non-OSS solutions".  However, the "Annual TCO per PC" costs
> in the table in Appendix 3 suggest that there is a saving to
> be made in "Consumables" simply by using OSS!  Impossible!!  
> This anomaly must, therefore, cast doubt on whether any of
> the other figures are truly comparable.  For example, are
> BECTA really suggesting that schools saved money on hardware
> simply by using OSS?  Similarly, I would have expected to see
> a significant cost saving on software between schools that
> use OSS and those that don't, but on this evidence, only
> relatively small cost savings are attainable!
>
> The report completely ignores the fact that "support costs"
> account for >60% of TCO in either scenario.  It seems to me,
> therefore, that schools stand to gain far more by trying to
> find ways of reducing their ICT support costs rather than
> their software licencing costs!
>
> I liked the fact that the study considered the use of OSS in
> different areas within ICT infrastructures, i.e. on servers,
> on PCs in the Classroom, and on PCs in the Admin Office, but
> I was disappointed that having established that there were
> good reasons for using OSS on servers, it didn't go on to
> spell out exactly what these servers were being used for and
> what specific operating system and application software had
> been used.  Similarly, I was surprised that the report seemed
> to conclude that the range of OSS application software for
> use in Classrooms was comparable with that for Windows.  No
> chance!  Mind you, judging by the list of "OSS packages
> available" (Appendix 2), e.g. IPTABLES, NMAP, FCRON, GREP,
> VI(!), I doubt very much whether the author is actually
> familiar with any of this software and/or has spent any time
> in a classroom!
>
> In summary: I think reports like this are dangerous.  At
> best, they serve no useful purpose, lacking the depth and
> credibility required to enable managers to make informed
> investment decisions.  At worse, however, they can seriously
> mislead people which, in this particular case, would only end
> up damaging the OSS cause - perhaps irreparably!
>
> Just my 2p.
>
> Thanks, Mark.

I must say i agreed with much of this.

AED
-- 
"If you make decisions about software -- or anything -- based solely on
short-term cost and benefit, someone with a longer view can easily
manoeuver you into a trap from which it is hard to escape."  
  
 
 
_______________________________________________
AktiviX-discuss mailing list
AktiviX-discuss at lists.aktivix.org
http://lists.aktivix.org/mailman/listinfo/aktivix-discuss




More information about the AktiviX-discuss mailing list