Open Source Software in a corporate setting?

[DarkManX]

Does anyone have experience implementing or using OSS in a business setting? I am working on a school project and am in the planning stages and trying to do research. does anyone have any real life scenarios they can share?
such as real life problems that arose?
I assume there are some file compatibility, issues with integration with other 3rd party applications (IE.. Sharepoint)


One thing Im not concerned with is the cost savings which are pretty obvious and there is already alot of research and documentation on this available.

My plan is to have a set of users use the application.. (using Open Office.. as opposed to MS office) and get their feedback. Their does not appear to be much information regarding actual user acceptance of the software.


Primarily im going to be focusing on implementing open office in a large company with about 20,000 end users. (I have a project sponsor at this company and will be able to use their enduser base for testing)

It seems like the benefits are pretty clear as to why to switch, im going to focus my research on the reason why this isnt happening. Please dont turn this into an Office/open office debate... that is irrelevant to my project.

 

[HannibalX]

A lot of it isn't free if you're using it for business. Read the EULA.

 

[BurnItDwn]

A lot of it isn't free if you're using it for business. Read the EULA.

All the common open source licenses I know of mean free for business use.
Open source is NOT AT ALL the same thing as traditional "freeware" or "shareware"

 

[HannibalX]

All the common open source licenses I know of mean free for business use.
Open source is NOT AT ALL the same thing as traditional "freeware" or "shareware"

This is why you need to READ THE EULA.

 

[Matthiasa]

There is a reason its normally not done. The average user is stupid, and without there being real support it becomes hard to manage.

 

[Pantlegz]

I've used and implemented Open office in cooperate offices and it works pretty good the one complaint I normally get is that the excel formulas are different. The other issue is Open office is java based, I think, and tends to work the cpu more. Even if it's not java based it taxes CPUs quite a bit more in my experience that office.

As far as compatibility issues, I know of none. I think it's mostly something different and end users inability to understand that it's pretty much the same thing.

 

[TwiceOver]

Tools: Yes, Desktop Stuff: Not so much.

My engineers would kill me if they had to use O.

As for other Open Source stuff like tools... Yes, use tons of them.

 

[Zombie]

I guess I misunderstood. I was thinking of open source for development.
--->
Over where I work we prefer OSS. Version control works well when you set up maven repository and project builds with maven.

 

[SpatiallyAware]

Supporting it can be really REALLY tough.

Hopefully you know ALL about what you're deploying, as paying a consultant to come in will be $$$$$$+$$$$$$$$$$$ over a "supported" product.

Also, rest assured that you WILL be hung out to dry once you leave the company and someone else has to take over. They will blame you for being an idiot installing something that is near impossible to support and deal with.




As a consultant I've handled 5-6 situations (spam servers, mail server, helpdesk software, etc) and every single one was a nightmare. Whoever installed it (I'm sure) thought they were saving their company a ton of money but in the end more was spent replacing it with a decent solution. In each case something was totally borked and the software was 4-5 years old thus no longer 'popular' thus documentation was nil. Most of the time the logical thing to do is replace with a mainstream supported product so they're not paying me $$$$$/hr every week to deal with it.


Edit:

I am basically assuming you're not talking about a tool here and there or app like open office. I'm talking about the (primarily) linux based stuff for serving up mail, doing helpdesk tickets, spam/spyware filtering and etc. I.E. server apps.

 

[Hacp]

Java is slow as hell. Why isn't Open Office written in C++?

 

[Gibson486]

Java is slow as hell. Why isn't Open Office written in C++?

i don;t think Open office is written in all Java....

 

[Red Squirrel]

Sadly, at least where I work, they are against anything free or open source. They normally go for the most expensive. If the customer is unwiling, then they compromize using the worse hackish way possible instead of going to an open source solution.

The main argument is usually support. If it does not have paid support, they wont touch it. Guess I see their point, but in some cases you don't need support, depending on how complex or critical the app is. You will have better chance troubleshooting OSS that is popular (ex: Linux) then something expensive and proprietary.

 

[Genx87]

Support is the biggest thing imo. It doesnt save the company any money if revenue generating people cant produce because the open source "free" software doesnt work and nobody knows how to fix it.

 

[ViviTheMage]

First hand experience, is Tools are great as open source, but desktop apps, for the users suck...support is pretty weak MOST of the time.

Also, read the EULA, OSS is not always 'free' for businesses.

 

[wwswimming]

speaking of "Open Source Software in a corporate setting", i'm wondering if Blender, a 3D animation program, is going to eat into Autodesk sales.

there are some particle effects that i've seen done in Max and i know can be done in Maya, that i haven't seen in Blender. also, fur, and some of the advanced 3D Max stuff like Motion Mixer.

but Blender (the open source 3D software) is just coming along. there's got to be some studio managers that are looking at the wave Blender-trained young professionals coming into the workforce, and thinking, "hmmm ... maybe we should have some Blender workstation seats".

Autodesk is responding by coming out with some killer deals on their software (basically, "everything" for $300 - Max, Maya, XSI, & Mudbox).


the question posed in the original post also makes me wonder - how many Fortune 500 corporations have abandoned Windows and gone Linux ? seems like a natural way to save money, if the Linux aps are there, which i think they are. for most areas except maybe computer-aided design.

 

[BTA]

The real issue is that corporations always need somebody to blame, at a higher level than their own support staff, and you can't really do that with open source apps.

 

[ultimatebob]

There is a reason its normally not done. The average user is stupid, and without there being real support it becomes hard to manage.

True, but apps like Firefox are a good example of an open source app that isn't hard to use.

Hell... some open source applications like UltraVNC are better than their paid counterparts!

 

[kami333]

Sadly, at least where I work, they are against anything free or open source. They normally go for the most expensive. If the customer is unwiling, then they compromize using the worse hackish way possible instead of going to an open source solution.

The main argument is usually support. If it does not have paid support, they wont touch it. Guess I see their point, but in some cases you don't need support, depending on how complex or critical the app is. You will have better chance troubleshooting OSS that is popular (ex: Linux) then something expensive and proprietary.

Even the illusion of having support is sometimes sufficient.

From my experience, "we've got our consultant and the vendor working on it" tends to placate the higher ups better than "DarkManX is in the back room looking up solutions on forums".

Last time I looked into OO, lack of support for EndNote and some issues with tracking changes was the biggest issue for me.

The real issue is that corporations always need somebody to blame, at a higher level than their own support staff, and you can't really do that with open source apps.

This to ^^^

 

[JD50]

Yes, my company uses OSS almost exclusively.

 

[Red Squirrel]

Even the illusion of having support is sometimes sufficient.

From my experience, "we've got our consultant and the vendor working on it" tends to placate the higher ups better than "DarkManX is in the back room looking up solutions on forums".

Last time I looked into OO, lack of support for EndNote and some issues with tracking changes was the biggest issue for me.

Yep it's true. I work in a hospital and we have at least 100 different apps, some of which only 2 people might use, but they're still critical. We discover a new app almost on a daily bassis, and we are suppose to support it.

These are VERY outdated, have next to no documentation, return 0 results in google, and you're lucky if your phone call even hits an IVR and does not just auto hang up or give an error that the number is no longer valid, let alone an actual person. But hey, it has support!

This is actually a good example here of one we had to deal with:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o82L7oVMysM

But yeah from a management point of view it does look better, even though it's not. It's sad really that it works that way.

 

[chusteczka]

One of the benefits for using freely available software is that a medium to large company can easily gain the developing group's attention, regardless of monetary contributions.

My last employer depends heavily on Oracle for its database applications. When my employer decided to change from TOAD to Oracle's SQL Developer, we found numerous issues. Our course of action was to contact Oracle. This resulted in direct communication with Oracle that placed our input, needs, and bugs into a high priority level for their consideration and attention to fix.

 

[DarkManX]

Yes, my company uses OSS almost exclusively.

can you tell me more? what particular applications? any barriers?

 

[MixMasterTang]

Sadly, at least where I work, they are against anything free or open source. They normally go for the most expensive. If the customer is unwiling, then they compromize using the worse hackish way possible instead of going to an open source solution.

The main argument is usually support. If it does not have paid support, they wont touch it. Guess I see their point, but in some cases you don't need support, depending on how complex or critical the app is. You will have better chance troubleshooting OSS that is popular (ex: Linux) then something expensive and proprietary.

Shit rolls down hill, if there's no official support, when something goes wrong, the person who chose the product without support is the bottom of that hill. As opposed to the vendor being the bottom of the hill and can be blamed for everything.

 

[0roo0roo]

One thing Im not concerned with is the cost savings which are pretty obvious and there is already alot of research and documentation on this available.

it is not obvious or a given.
employee time and comfort is far more important than the tiny initial cost of software.

 

[Legendary]

Shit rolls down hill, if there's no official support, when something goes wrong, the person who chose the product without support is the bottom of that hill. As opposed to the vendor being the bottom of the hill and can be blamed for everything.

QFT

You do not want to be the guy that chose the OSS that FUBARed something important. You want to be the guy with the phone # for the people that are supposed to fix it because you paid them.

Also large one time expenditures on capital can be accounted for differently and save a company a bit of money vs. OSS + tons of problems even if the out of pocket expenses are the same