Docstoc

Open Source Product Evaluation

Document Sample
Open Source Product Evaluation Powered By Docstoc
					                       Oregon Department of
                       Transportation
                       Technology Management




                       -Open Source Desktop Evaluation-



                                               Template: P920S Product Evaluation
                                                                        Template Version 1.0*
                                                                        Template Owner: TM




Author(s): Kathy Elgin, Kevin Erickson, Dan Dority

Approval Authority: Ben Berry
                    Chief Information Officer
                    Oregon Department of Transportation
                    555 13th Street NE, Suite 1
                    Salem, OR 97301-4166
                    Phone: (503) 986-3243 Fax: (503) 986-4072
                    Mailto:ben.berry@odot.state.or.us
                    Try our ODOT Internet site: http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/


                                                                     Last Updated: 12/10/2007
                                                                   Deliverable History
  Deliverable        Description                                             Reviewed By                           Date           Outcome
   Version^
         1.0         First Draft—K Elgin                          Kevin Erickson, Dan Dority                    12/01/07          Revisions made
         2.0         2nd Draft—K Elgin                                 Kevin Erickson                           12/17/08          Revisions made
         3.0         3rd draft—K Elgin                            Kevin Erickson, Dan Dority                     1/23/08          Software costs added



  ^ This version changes as the document is revised.


                                                                     Table of Contents
  1.      PRODUCT EVALUATION OVERVIEW ..................................................................................................................... 3

  2.      EVALUATION STRATEGY – AN UNBIASED APPROACH.................................................................................... 3
  2.1.         EVALUATION APPROACH ................................................................................................................................................ 3
  2.2.         EVALUATION METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................................................................ 4
  2.3.         PRODUCT SELECTION ..................................................................................................................................................... 4
  3.      SUMMARY OF EVALUATION FINDINGS ................................................................................................................ 4
  3.1.         TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY ................................................................................................................................................ 4
  3.2.         POTENTIAL FOR COST SAVINGS: ..................................................................................................................................... 5
  3.3.         ORGANIZATIONAL RISKS: ............................................................................................................................................... 9
  4.      DETAILED EVALUATION FINDINGS ....................................................................................................................... 9
  4.1.         INFRASTRUCTURE FINDINGS ........................................................................................................................................... 9
  4.2.         DESKTOP OPERATING SYSTEM FINDINGS ..................................................................................................................... 10
  4.3.         END USER EXPERIENCE FINDINGS ................................................................................................................................ 11
  5.      RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................................................................... 12

  APPENDIX A: THREE LAYERS OF EVALUATION ...................................................................................................... 14

  APPENDIX B: ODOT BASE MODEL AND OPEN SOURCE ALTERNATIVE ............................................................. 15

  APPENDIX C: ODOT FUNCTION-SPECIFIC SOFTWARE ........................................................................................... 16

  APPENDIX D: INFRASTRUCTURE ITEMS FOR ALTERNATIVE SOLUTION ........................................................ 17


                                                                                Purpose
  The purpose of this deliverable is to:

        Determine if the solution objectives have been met.
        Identify ways to address unrealized outcomes.




4d1d6b04-f5dc-4356-9799-d9646b3b1e37.doc                                                                                                                   Page 2 of 17
  Open Source Desktop                                                             P920S Product
  Evaluation


  1.      Product Evaluation Overview
          Today’s IT departments need to do more with fewer budget dollars and ODOT is no
          exception. The lure of implementing Open Source PC strategies is fueled by vendor
          publications that portray open source solutions as transforming the economics of IT by
          eliminating the need to purchase, integrate and maintain proprietary software, freeing up
          “hundreds of thousands of dollars”.
          As Open Source offerings mature, the potential for significant savings has attracted the
          interest of many organizations including the Oregon State Legislature. ODOT and other
          State Agencies have partnered to form the CIOC Open Source Community of Practice
          Charter, which is sponsored and promoted by the State CIO and the Chair of the CIO
          Council. This Charter was formed to assess the business opportunity presented by Open
          Source Software (“OSS”).
          ODOT Technology Management (TM) was asked to evaluate the opportunity of moving to
          an Open Source desktop and to recommend methodologies for Open Source software
          evaluation. TM’s evaluation focused on the cost benefit and technical feasibility of
          instituting an Open Source desktop. Administrative desire, political will, and procurement
          and other issues can be addressed as follow on or parallel studies; they were not considered
          within the scope of this evaluation.
          The following are product evaluation objectives:
                Evaluate the potential for cost savings
                Show true costs to move to an Open Source desktop, including impact to the
                 organization (training, support, licensing)

  2.      Evaluation Strategy – An Unbiased Approach
              2.1.    Evaluation Approach

          The evaluation approach for the technical feasibility study started with the premise that all
          software has the same opportunity to satisfy the user. The software can range in complexity
          from that of an operating system to a word processing tool. The criteria should always lead
          to the result of “can I do my job in the most effective and efficient manner possible.”
          Evaluation criteria include answering the following base questions:
                Can this application work within our current infrastructure?
                If the application will not work in the current infrastructure, what will it take to make
                 it work within that infrastructure?
                What tool(s) are we using today to accomplish the end user’s job?
                What alternative tool(s) could be used to accomplish the user’s job?



4d1d6b04-f5dc-4356-9799-d9646b3b1e37.doc                                                     Page 3 of 17
  Open Source Desktop                                                            P920S Product
  Evaluation
          With desktop PCs, the major deciding factor for application selection is the operating
          system. Consequently, this evaluation included the O/S and its interaction with the
          enterprise network to determine the viability of the application as a tool the user needs to
          perform their task. For example, the current infrastructure of Oregon Department of
          Transportation (ODOT) is Microsoft Windows-based. So, the inclusion of OSS requires the
          ability of the software to work with the current operating system or requires the addition of a
          LINUX desktop PC to the ODOT infrastructure.

                 2.2.   Evaluation Methodology

          TM evaluated three basic layers (see Appendix A), with the first layer being the operating
          system itself, to determine compatibility, interoperability and ease of use within ODOT’s
          environment. The methodology encompassed basic business computing criteria, the work
          flow a user would follow to perform their job and the platform best suited for this type of
          work.
          To conduct this evaluation TM developed a reusable evaluation process. Requirements were
          neutrally defined functional software needs, based on the current base model. To ensure the
          end user did not lose basic functionality, evaluation criteria was based on ability to provide
          like-scalability or improve usability.

          2.3.     Product Selection

            After researching multiple OS product offerings, TM selected SUSE Linux Enterprise as
            the product most likely to meet basic business computing needs, as defined by ODOT’s
            current basic workstation build. The criteria used for product selection was based on the
            basic ODOT desktop build (see Appendix B.)


  3.      Summary of Evaluation Findings
                 3.1.   Technical Feasibility

                   As TM evaluated open source software for the desktop, it became apparent that
                   while Open Source provides opportunities within particular business environments
                   or for particular business functionality needs; it is not ready for implementation
                   across a mature infrastructure.
                   We found no examples of large organizations migrating from a Windows desktop to
                   an Open Source desktop. Having said that, it is important to mention Open Source
                   strategies where optimal benefit can be found. Niche areas that do not require access
                   to files or shared windows services such as, Kiosks, call centers and business-
                   specific applications are areas to investigate for cost savings. Basically this means
                   identifying candidates for an Open Source desktop case by case.




4d1d6b04-f5dc-4356-9799-d9646b3b1e37.doc                                                     Page 4 of 17
  Open Source Desktop                                                            P920S Product
  Evaluation
                 It would be a huge cost and human commitment to implement an Open Source
                 desktop across a large organization. There would not be a “basic build” used by all
                 or even most; there would be a combination of vendor-supported open source
                 applications, Open Source applications (no support, customized), and 3rd party
                 applications and all Access database applications would need to be rewritten. This
                 would be a custom environment in which the build used would depend on business
                 needs, case by case.
                 Further, this scenario would involve a complete retooling and retraining of the
                 organization and the migration would likely take years. Support for both
                 environments would be necessary throughout the process. The impact would be
                 significant in terms of support cost and learning curve.
                 Another approach would be to implement selectively. In this scenario additional
                 staff would still be needed to administer the highly customized environment. Staff to
                 configure, manage and maintain the open source desktop environment would need
                 extensive training. End user staff would also need training to learn their new
                 environment.
                 To make Linux viable in a Windows environment ODOT would need to maintain
                 two independent networks – one Windows-based to perform most business functions
                 and one Linux-based to perform business-specific functions. The Open Source
                 environment would include a Linux management environment such as ZenWorks to
                 serve as the active directory and Open Enterprise Services (OES). This configuration
                 allows the management of basic shared Open Source services, such as file and print
                 and the communication between the Exchange and Enterprise mail systems. This
                 will not, however, address file sharing.
                 Going “Open Source” would definitely not be a “plug and play” type of change but a
                 significant change.

          3.2.   Potential for Cost Savings:

                 There were many reasons for ODOT to consider Open Source options for desktop
                 computers. Among them:
                        Microsoft's pricing policies have become increasingly unfavorable to
                         organizations
                        Software costs are significantly rising relative to hardware costs
                        IT department budgets are shrinking
                        Open Source solutions are maturing
                        Open Source licenses provide a significantly greater degree of freedom
                 The potential for cost savings was evaluated independent of the feasibility question.
                 TM considered the cost of the Microsoft Enterprise Licensing Agreement (MELA)
                 for office productivity software and open source equivalents (see Appendix B).



4d1d6b04-f5dc-4356-9799-d9646b3b1e37.doc                                                      Page 5 of 17
  Open Source Desktop                                                                     P920S Product
  Evaluation
                 ODOT currently has a 36 Month Agreement with Microsoft that covers the operating
                 system, Client Access Licenses (CALS) and Microsoft Office Pro. ODOT pays an
                 annual fee for license maintenance and software upgrades. This proposed annual fee
                 is $168.76 per desktop ($168,760 per 1,000.)
                 A high-level cost estimate for the infrastructure and initial start up costs necessary to
                 obtain basic functionality with an Open Source solution, which does not require
                 modifications to Access databases, for 1,000 workstations across ODOT is $943,000.
                 The annual ongoing cost is estimated to be $425,400.


                 The following table summarizes initial costs (see Appendices B, C and D for a
                 breakdown of OSS costs); this list does not include specialty tool equivalents for
                 products like MSProject and Remedy or project-related costs:
                       Needed to Support Basic Build                 Initial Costs for
                                                                 SUSE Linux Enterprise
                     Operating System per 1000 desktops                              $0
                     Software Licensing per 1000 desktops                        $35,000
                                                                                 $215,000
                     Enterprise Infrastructure
                     Training for 31 Support Technicians                         $210,000
                     Training for 10 Developers and Server                        $68,000
                     Support Technicians
                     Training for 1,000 End Users                                $250,000
                     Conversion of Existing Access Applications                 $50,000,000*
                     Additional Support FTE (salary only)
                     Total                                                      $50,978,000
                 * Estimate based on previous Access modification effort that occurred during the XP rollout. There
                 are approximately 10,000 Access database applications requiring an average of 100 hours per
                 application to convert, at $50 per hour.



                 The following table summarizes the approximate ongoing cost differences (see
                 Appendices B, C and D for a breakdown of OSS costs); it does not include the cost of
                 specialty tool equivalents for products like MSProject and Topaz:
                                                         Ongoing               Ongoing
                     Needed to Support Basic
                                                          MELA               SUSE Linux
                                Build
                                                           Costs           Enterprise Costs
                     Operating System per 1000               (included below)                 $0
                     desktops
                     Software Licensing per 1000                $168,760                      $0
                     desktops
                     Software Maintenance                    (included above)               $51,000
                     Hardware (4 servers at SDC                    NA                       $38,400
                     rates of $800/mo)


4d1d6b04-f5dc-4356-9799-d9646b3b1e37.doc                                                              Page 6 of 17
  Open Source Desktop                                                                           P920S Product
  Evaluation

                     Additional Support FTE (salary                   NA                        $336,000*
                     only)
                     Total                                       $168,760                        $425,400
                 * Support costs will depend on the installation strategy. This figure assumes the implementation of
                 1000 desktops and further assumes that this will require a minimum of 4 FTE (2 ISS5s and 2 ISS6s) to
                 maintain the OSS infrastructure and provide end user support. These dollars are not fully loaded.


                 The following tables describe the advantages and disadvantages of staying with the
                 Windows/ MELA environment or moving to an Open Source Environment.
                 Advantages:
                      WINDOWS/MELA APPROACH                                    OPEN SOURCE APPROACH
                   Cost includes true up training PC’s and                 Securing individual desktops not as high a
                   individual second use PC’s.                             priority as is in Windows environment. Thus,
                                                                           the cost to maintain secure desktops decreases
                    Allows us to downgrade new purchases to the
                                                                           with Linux.
                   current configuration ODOT uses.
                   Allows us to upgrade computers without regard
                   to the manufactures license.
                   Consistent look and feel across all office product      Open Source community offers a plethora of
                   applications.                                           desktop software solutions.
                   Enables us to stay connected to Servers without         Virus attacks less likely in Open Source
                   concern for the server version. This enables            environment. This is due largely to the fact that
                   ODOT to function independent of server version          most virus writers are anti Windows/Microsoft.
                   from the SDC.
                   Windows OS support mechanism & knowledge
                   base already in place. No need for extensive
                   technical training for technicians or end users.
                   ODOT helpdesk has extensive knowledge and
                   background with supporting Windows OS and
                   Windows applications.
                   Infrastructure and secure server\desktop
                   platform and support mechanism already in
                   place.
                   More new and current software applications
                   available for Windows platform that are not built
                   for Open Source use.




4d1d6b04-f5dc-4356-9799-d9646b3b1e37.doc                                                                      Page 7 of 17
  Open Source Desktop                                                                         P920S Product
  Evaluation

                 Disadvantages:
                      WINDOWS/MELA APPROACH                                  OPEN SOURCE APPROACH
                    Perceived cost.                                       Requires application development to be
                                                                          platform neutral; need to convert Access
                                                                          database applications.
                                                                          Need to establish a parallel infrastructure for
                                                                          both production and test environments and
                                                                          provide the staff to maintain both.
                    Cost to acquire Microsoft products if we get off      Each application must meet tested across the
                    of the license is significantly higher than staying   entire “suite” of applications prior to
                    with the agreement.                                   introducing releases, updates or patches for an
                                                                          individual product; there is no one company
                                                                          testing across products, as is the case with
                                                                          Microsoft products.
                                                                          There is no corporate support; you post your
                                                                          request for assistance on a forum and wait for
                                                                          someone to offer you help. The help is usually
                                                                          good not always timely if you’re working to
                                                                          the clock. If you get a really obscure error
                                                                          message or particularly weird problem, you
                                                                          could be waiting for help for a long time.
                                                                          Need to develop and improve tracking of PC
                                                                          licenses; need to true up the license count and
                                                                          make improvements to the methods for
                                                                          obtaining the counts; difficult to determine
                                                                          payment of cost per section
                                                                          Users will be responsible for the development
                                                                          and maintenance of improvements not covered
                                                                          under the open source solution. This means
                                                                          ODOT will need a second development staff if
                                                                          customizations are needed. Changes in the
                                                                          application are not predictable.

                                                                          The ability to replicate multiple desktops via
                                                                          imaging more time intensive and not
                                                                          conducive for pushing out a high number of
                                                                          new or rebuilt PC’s.
                                                                          ODOT would depend on 3rd party apps for
                                                                          basic desktop functionality.
                                                                          Basic OS and Office applications do not meet
                                                                          the most basic ODOT needs. Commercial
                                                                          applications costs equal to those currently in
                                                                          use.
                                                                          There are many Open Source or free
                                                                          applications for Linux, but they only offer
                                                                          basic desktop functionality.




4d1d6b04-f5dc-4356-9799-d9646b3b1e37.doc                                                                    Page 8 of 17
  Open Source Desktop                                                               P920S Product
  Evaluation

                                                                Limited, less robust training is available;
                                                                potential for contracted training and trainers.
                                                                Much more software incompatibility exists in
                                                                the Linux world because many software
                                                                vendors do not write their applications to work
                                                                on the Linux OS



          3.3.     Organizational Risks:

                   One of the risks with open source is that there are no rules for how a commercial
                   open source vendor’s free offering will evolve. The decision to use an open source
                   license can present a quagmire of patent, trademark and copyright law issues as
                   vendors determine the direction of their products.
                   One of the drawbacks and another risk of the open-source software development
                   model is that mainstream users often get left behind because the really technical
                   people create the software design functionality for themselves, not for the average
                   user. According to Gartner, as open source evolves, positions that some community
                   members may take from each other over various subjects (for example, intellectual
                   property) widen over time as well. Consequently, as open source evolves, it must
                   support an increasingly disparate community membership.
                   Yet another risk is the need to retool and retrain the entire organization. ODOT
                   technicians noted a steep learning curve and need for extensive training before they
                   would be effective or efficient using the open source tools being evaluated. This
                   experience would likely be more significant on non-technical end users.


  4.      Detailed Evaluation Findings
                 4.1.   Infrastructure Findings

                   To be successful in ODOT’s environment, the first layer of basic connectivity must
                   interact with minimal effort within the current infrastructure (network, servers,
                   databases, etc.). This evaluation layer determines if the alternative software works
                   within the basic infrastructure.
                   TM found that basic connectivity was possible with the Linux desktop. There were
                   some functionality issues such as network lag and sporadic application failure and
                   support of personal folders was not an available function.




4d1d6b04-f5dc-4356-9799-d9646b3b1e37.doc                                                          Page 9 of 17
  Open Source Desktop                                                                       P920S Product
  Evaluation

              4.2.    Desktop Operating System Findings

                 The Open Source solution would not run on ODOT’s current infrastructure.
                 Therefore, implementing would require a second network infrastructure with servers
                 communicating between the two environments. To support both a Linux and
                 Windows environment, ODOT would need to hire and train additional support staff
                 to manage and maintain the Linux network. Maintaining both Linux and Windows
                 servers results in increased costs due to hardware redundancy and IT staff training
                 requirements. This removes much of the cost effectiveness sought and must be
                 considered in the cost to move to a Linux desktop.
                 A Linux Desktop can be installed with no licensing requirement. Licensed versions
                 include support and patches. Novell, for example, offers automated patching of
                 licensed desktops through ZENworks Linux Management. Other monitoring and
                 management tools involve additional seat licenses. There are also per-seat costs for
                 messaging, such as Evolution, to integrate with Microsoft Exchange environments.
                 The costs for management software greatly outstrip the price of actual desktop
                 software.
                 While the desktops run Linux, the maintenance environment may not. The LANDesk
                 Management Suite, for example, will monitor both Windows and Linux Desktops
                 but must be installed on Windows servers. Novell's ZENworks Linux Management
                 can be installed on Linux servers but cannot manage Windows desktops.
                 Deploying a new O/S at the enterprise level requires having the appropriate tools to
                 configure and maintain a Linux machine; that security policies can be carried out and
                 that O/S patching is as effective and efficient as in the current environment. Virus
                 protection, Microsoft Systems Management Server (SMS) type tool and remote
                 administration equivalents must be available.
                 Initial tests revealed difficulties replicating the build, which would be necessary to
                 deploy desktops across the enterprise.

                         Evaluation Questions                                      Finding
                   Can the software be easily replicated,   At this time replication is inconsistent. Technicians
                   deployed, re-installed and maintained?   experienced multiple issues.
                   How easily can the system be updated     Patch management would be easier with 3rd party
                   with new patches or the latest version   software like ZenWorks and Open Enterprise Server.
                   of the operating system?
                   Is the back up and recovery process      No.
                   effective and efficient?
                   How easy would it be to install and      Installation of anything requires root privileges. IP
                   maintain network printers                printing is relatively simple, but interferes with
                                                            Windows print queues. To print using Windows print
                                                            queues, you need a 3rd party service, like ZenWorks
                                                            and Open Enterprise Server.




4d1d6b04-f5dc-4356-9799-d9646b3b1e37.doc                                                                Page 10 of 17
  Open Source Desktop                                                                            P920S Product
  Evaluation
                    Are all necessary drivers available           All Linux drivers would need to be downloaded and
                    and/or how soon would they be                 stored on a shared server
                    available
                    Can we use one email server or do we          Mail service, which runs on servers, can communicate
                    need to configure multiple servers, and       with each other. A Linux workstation would need
                    how well do they play together?               significant 3rd party support to be able to communicate
                                                                  effectively with a Windows Exchange server. PSTs
                                                                  would need to be converted.
                    Is data sharing (interoperability) easy       Data sharing is cumbersome without the use of a 3rd
                    or difficult between various O/S’s?           party Open Enterprise Server.
                    Is there adequate support for the O/S         Support depends upon the O/S selected. IS staff would
                    when assistance is required?                  be required to obtain sufficient Linux training to
                                                                  acquire the ability to troubleshoot.
                    How flexible is the O/S in handling           The Linux desktop is not flexible at all when adding
                    various hardware add-ons?                     new hardware. Linux does not use plug-n-play so you
                                                                  have to know how to configure the OS to work with
                                                                  new hardware.




               4.3.     End User Experience Findings

          The most important layer is the “end user experience,” where the end user uses enterprise
          applications to perform their daily work. This evaluation layer determines the ability of
          alternative applications to meet basic business computing needs (e.g., word processing and
          spreadsheet functions), as defined by ODOT’s current basic workstation build.
          This area presented the most difficulty. Terminal emulation, which is used extensively in the
          DMV field, failed basic functionality. The Access equivalent was another issue. 3rd party
          solutions would be needed to provide this functionality and all the Access database
          applications converted. The cost of conversion would be significant.

                           Evaluation Questions                                               Finding
           What infrastructure does it require?                             For Linux to work efficiently, we need to
                                                                            have Open Enterprise Server.
           Will it install and operate in the current infrastructure as     It will install and run but not without multiple
           is?                                                              issues on a day-to-day basis.
           If the software will not install and operate in the current      A parallel environment would need to be
           infrastructure, what modifications need to be made?              established. The open source environment
                                                                            will require ZenWorks, Open Enterprise
                                                                            Server and Lightweight Direct Access
                                                                            Protocol (an active directory equivalent.)
           Will this new infrastructure support the user’s work,            Not across the enterprise.
           meaning all of the software necessary for the person to
           perform their work in the most effective and efficient
           manner?




4d1d6b04-f5dc-4356-9799-d9646b3b1e37.doc                                                                      Page 11 of 17
  Open Source Desktop                                                                           P920S Product
  Evaluation
           What additional pieces of software are required to enable       There are numerous 3rd party applications
           all of these tools (i.e., terminal emulators, other operating   that are needed to enable users to perform
           system emulators, etc.) so a user can perform their work?       their daily work routines effectively. This
                                                                           would need to be determined on a case by
                                                                           case basis.
           How many users can take advantage of this configuration?        At best, it may be possible to create a
                                                                           business-specific Linux build for niche
                                                                           purposes, on a case by case basis.



          Finally, there are function-specific tools. These tools have specific roles such as ODOT’s
          Bridge applications, Geographical Information System (GIS) applications, right-of-way, etc.
          The need here is for a tool(s) that can perform the same in-depth, computationally intensive
          functions usually requiring a team of engineers to develop the software. If there are open
          source tools available, they will tend to focus on one area of the tool’s ability. So piecing
          together a tool for the same capability as COTS may not fit the efficient and effective
          category. Most vendors offer various flavors of the tool to work with various flavors of
          O/S’s. The issue then becomes cost.


  5.      Recommendations
          While Open Source provides opportunities within particular business environments or for
          particular business functionality needs, it is not ready for implementation across a mature
          infrastructure:
               Enterprise customers are using open-source software but issues of interoperability
                are still a stumbling block.
               Moving to an Open Source desktop solution within ODOT would not achieve the
                same or better functionality for the end user.
               Enterprise customers need assurance that Open Source solutions will continue to
                work together over update cycles before they will expand the adoption of open-
                source components across their IT environments.
               Reliance on multiple sources for basic computing functionality coupled with
                unpredictable changes in Open Source components puts the organization at risk.
               There is generally a lack of certifiable quality when it comes to solutions that build
                on multiple Open Source components, where a change in one underlying component
                can break the entire solution.
               Open Source is not “free”; there are many hidden costs to support a dual
                environment and to make OSS work in ODOT’s environment, in support of ODOT
                computing needs.
               Moving to an Open Source desktop would require retooling and retraining. ODOT
                does not have experts/expertise in building and supporting specialized Open Source
                Transportation applications.




4d1d6b04-f5dc-4356-9799-d9646b3b1e37.doc                                                                    Page 12 of 17
  Open Source Desktop                                                            P920S Product
  Evaluation
          Until these issues are resolved, organizational risks will continue to block widespread
          adoption of Open Source.
          The value proposition for an open source desktop is strongest for data entry and processing
          staff that depend on thin client applications and have minimal or no requirements for
          productivity applications. However, the cost to maintain two networks and two support staff
          must be considered.
          To truly go “Open Source”, an organization must have executive support to:
              Make all new application development based on an open infrastructure format (i.e.,
               applications need to be platform neutral) and all files formats based on an open file
               format, as opposed to a windows-based format, and
              Convert all existing applications to be platform neutral. For example, ODOT has
               over 50,000 Access database applications that would need to be converted.
          Moving in this direction would better position ODOT to take advantage of Open Source and
          significantly reduce the risks.




4d1d6b04-f5dc-4356-9799-d9646b3b1e37.doc                                                   Page 13 of 17
  Open Source Desktop                      P920S Product
  Evaluation


  Appendix A: Three Layers of Evaluation




4d1d6b04-f5dc-4356-9799-d9646b3b1e37.doc           Page 14 of 17
  Open Source Desktop                                                            P920S Product
  Evaluation


  Appendix B: ODOT Base Model and Open Source Alternative
  The following table lists ODOT’s current Base Model software and the SUSE software alternative.
  TM selected SUSE Linux Enterprise as the product most likely to meet basic business computing
  needs, as defined by ODOT’s current basic workstation build.

                      Base Model Software                SUSE Software Alternative Cost
          MS Windows XP Pro                           SUSE Linux Enterprise—$0
          .Net Framework V.1                          NA
          .Net Framework V.2                          NA
          Adobe Acrobat Reader                        $0
          Adobe SVG Viewer                            NA
          AlternaTiff                                 XnView -- $5.13
          Avery Wizard                                NA
          Diskeeper                                   NA
                                                      No Equivalent
          Esticker
                                                         Need to develop
          Macromedia Authorware                       NA
          Macromedia Flash Player                     NA
          Macromedia Shockwave                        NA
                                                      FireFox—$0
          MS Internet Explorer                           Reported to have issue with patches not being
                                                      up to date
          MS MDAC                                     NA
          MS Media Player                             Free Non-Supported
          MS Native SQL Driver                        MySQL—$0
                                                      StarOffice—$ 35
          MS Office                                      MySQL w/full db functionality (Access
                                                      equivalent)—$600
          MS Outlook Express                          Evolution—$0
          MS Windows Installer                        NA
          MS Windows Script Host                      NA
          MS XML                                      NA
          OfficeScan                                  OfficeScan Same cost
          Sun Java JRE (4.2)                          Sun Java JRE (4.2)—$0
          Sun Java JRE (5.6)                          Sun Java JRE (5.6)—$0
                                                      Some equivalents are available, ranging from
          Visio Viewer                                $25-$65 per client. More research is needed to
                                                      identify a good fit.
          WinZip                                      Gzip—$0
          Tablet Journal Viewer                       NA
          Universal Audio Hotfix                      NA




4d1d6b04-f5dc-4356-9799-d9646b3b1e37.doc                                                     Page 15 of 17
  Open Source Desktop                                                       P920S Product
  Evaluation


  Appendix C: ODOT Function-Specific Software
  The function-specific tools noted below are used throughout ODOT but are not part of ODOT’s
  basic build. More research is needed to identify the best open source equivalents, but some
  products have been identified to date.

                                                        Linux O/S               OSS Cost
            Product Name        Linux Equivalent        Supported               per client
                                                    Red Hat, SuSE,       $268
          Microstation          Open Cascade        Fedora, Ubuntu
          MSProject             Open Workbench
          ArcView               Quantum Gis         GNU/Linux
                                Geographic
                                Resource Analysis
                                and Support
          ArcGIS                System (GRASS)      GNU/Linux,
          Street Atlas          GRASS               GNU/Linux,
          Office                StarOffice          Linux, Sun Solaris   $35
          Visio                 Various             KDE                  $25 - $65
          PDWP                  Unknown
          Terrain Navigator     GRASS               GNU/Linux,
          Rain (sp)             Unknown
          Acrobat
          Professional          PDFCreator
          Enforcer              Unknown
          Aspen                 Unknown
          InRoads               Unknown
          Attachmate            PowerTerm           SuSE                 $145
          Bentley Redline       Unknown
          ATC                   Unknown
          Metroscan             Unknown
          Realtime              Unknown
          HTCRS                 Unknown
          Pontis                Unknown
          IGA                   Unknown
          LeicaGeoOffice        Unknown
          FS Imaging            Unknown
          Champs                Unknown
          Topas                 Unknown
          Remedy




4d1d6b04-f5dc-4356-9799-d9646b3b1e37.doc                                                Page 16 of 17
  Open Source Desktop                                                         P920S Product
  Evaluation


  Appendix D: Infrastructure Items for Alternative Solution
  The following items are required to manage and support an OSS solution:

                     Item                        Purpose                       Cost
          ZenWorks                     Automates and enforces        $10 per workstation
                                       business and IT
                                       management processes
                                       across the lifecycle of
                                       desktops, laptops, servers
                                       and handhelds

          LDAP                         Active Directory Equivalent   $0

          Open Enterprise Server       Networking, communication $203 per workstation for
          (OES)                        and collaboration services; initial purchase
                                       works between Windows
                                       and OS platforms.

          Open Enterprise Server                                     $51 per workstation
          (OES) maintenance                                          annual cost

          3rd part extensions          To allow SMS-like pushes      $2 per 100 workstations




4d1d6b04-f5dc-4356-9799-d9646b3b1e37.doc                                               Page 17 of 17

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:1
posted:2/13/2012
language:
pages:17