[Web4lib] What Sort of Library is Open Source Software For?

Thu Sep 22 23:29:50 EDT 2005

I would like to second what David wrote.  Also, there is an assumption 
here that an Open Source software product might not be "finished" or 
"turnkey".

In fact, Apache is the most widely deployed web server on earth.

Mozilla's Firefox, while not enjoying the market share of Internet 
Explorer, is gaining popularity and certainly doesn't require any geeky 
hacker types to use.

I think there's a misconception between "good" software and "bad" 
software and the license it is distributed under has nothing to do with 
it.

There are times that commercial, closed source systems are a superior 
choice (EZProxy comes to mind here).  There are Open Source products 
that beat the pants off their commercial brethren (I think of Apache, 
MySQL or PostgreSQL [in most conditions for the latter two]).

There is no reason an Evergreen ILS or Koha couldn't compare to a 
Unicorn, Voyager, etc.  I'm not saying they do now, but they could, 
especially with more libraries' patronage.

And the geeks may be optional, but they will sure help things run more 
smoothly and ideally... that goes for commercial products equally to 
open source.

-Ross.

On Sep 22, 2005, at 9:32 PM, David Dorman wrote:

> At 02:15 PM 09/21/2005, Karen Coyle wrote:
>> Mike Taylor wrote:
>>
>>>> Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2005 19:06:46 -0700 (PDT)
>>>> From: li li <liligs1973 at yahoo.com>
>>>>
>>>> Do anyone know about the requirement and responsibility of system
>>>> staff maintaining Open source library systems?
>>>>
>>>
>>> That would be exactly the same as for proprietary systems.
>> For the developers, yes, that is probably the case. But the fact is 
>> that most libraries do not do development work on their own systems, 
>> they rely on vendors. I often feel like we are comparing the purchase 
>> of a vendor system with running your own open source system, and 
>> those are not comparable. The open source "gestalt" is very 
>> do-it-yourself, while the library approach to systems grows out of a 
>> recent (and pretty much ongoing) experience of purchasing "turnkey" 
>> solutions.
>
> Karen,
>
> Your observations, and the assumptions behind them, may be valid for a 
> lot of library Open Source software, but not for all of it, and 
> certainly not for Open Source software in general.
>
> You seem to be contrasting proprietary software distributed by a 
> commercial company with Open Source software distributed by a 
> non-commercial group of programmers, probably academic, that have a 
> do-it-yourself gestalt.
>
> What Mike is saying is that Open Source software is also distributed 
> by commercial companies as well.  These companies, and Index Data (for 
> which Mike and I both work) is among them, do not expect libraries to 
> have a "do-it-yourself" approach.  We offer complete "turnkey" systems 
> and commercial support for them.
>
> The big difference between commercial support for proprietary software 
> and commercial support for Open Source software is that the former is 
> obligatory and the latter is optional.  If you decide not to pay 
> ongoing support for proprietary software, you lose the right to use 
> it--totally.  If you decide not to pay for ongoing support for open 
> source software, you still retain the right to keep using it.  That is 
> one of the main reasons why support costs for proprietary software are 
> so high in comparison to support costs for Open Source software.  This 
> is what Mike was alluding to when he used the word "monopoly."  (My 
> only disagreement with Mike on this point is that, realistically, 
> there is not much choice for getting support.  In theory, anyone could 
> offer commercial support for Index Data's Open Source software.  In 
> practice, only Index Data does.)
>
>>  There are many libraries that don't have "root" on their own system, 
>> which is reserved by the vendor for maintenance and repairs (and to 
>> keep the library from getting itself into a mess that the vendor will 
>> then need to fix). So library "system staff" may not be doing 
>> programming or development currently, and the library may not have 
>> staff that can create applications.
>
> Here again you assume that there is no commercial company supporting 
> Open Source "turnkey" software.  A library that so wishes can treat 
> Open Source software from a commercial company as a black box to be 
> delved into only by the vendor.  The main reason that this is so 
> rarely done is that most librarians share your misconception that Open 
> Source software is only appropriate for libraries who have geeks to 
> grok it.  By perpetuating this myth and saying that library Open 
> Source software is appropriate only for libraries with lots of 
> technical experts (with lots of time on their hands), you do a 
> disservice to companies like Index Data and LibLime whose Open Source 
> software is fully (and commercially) supported and is quite 
> appropriate for any library, regardless of the level of involvement 
> they want with their software.
>
> David
>
>
>> kc
>>
>>> The only
>>> difference is that institutions with an open source system have
>>> additional _opportunities_, to do with control over how their system
>>> works and what it integrates with; but of course there is no
>>> requirement to take these opportunities up.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Are there other costs incurred by an open source library system?
>>>>
>>>
>>> No.  There is no reason at all why maintaining an open source system
>>> should be more expensive (in either time or money) than a proprietary
>>> one: in fact, the converse is usually true, since _any_ suitably
>>> skilled/experienced programmer can make changes as required to an 
>>> open
>>> source system, whereas with a proprietary system you are tied into 
>>> the
>>> vendor's support arrangements or nothing, with all the usual negative
>>> (for the customer!) consequences of any other monopoly.
>>>
>>> _/|_    
>>> ___________________________________________________________________
>>> /o ) \/  Mike Taylor  <mike at miketaylor.org.uk>  
>>> http://www.miketaylor.org.uk
>>> )_v__/\  "No man ought to surrender his own judgment to any mere 
>>> authority,
>>>         however respectable" - Joseph Priestley
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Web4lib mailing list
>>> Web4lib at webjunction.org
>>> http://lists.webjunction.org/web4lib/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> -----------------------------------
>> Karen Coyle / Digital Library Consultant
>> kcoyle at kcoyle.net http://www.kcoyle.net
>> ph.: 510-540-7596
>> fx.: 510-848-3913
>> mo.: 510-435-8234
>> ------------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Web4lib mailing list
>> Web4lib at webjunction.org
>> http://lists.webjunction.org/web4lib/
>>
>
> David Dorman
> US Marketing Manager, Index Data
> 52 Whitman Ave.
> West Hartford, Connecticut  06107
> dorman at indexdata.com
> 860-389-1568 or toll free 866-489-1568
> fax: 860-561-5613 or +45 3341 0101
>
> INDEX DATA Means Business
> for Open Source and Open Standards
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> www.indexdata.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Web4lib mailing list
> Web4lib at webjunction.org
> http://lists.webjunction.org/web4lib/
>