|
|
|
|
|
|
by laen
3789 days ago
|
|
|
Author is responsible for a majority of the Air Force software programs, but this experience is his first trial-by-fire. That said, not surprised that his first approach to the problem was to develop his own hardware and software standard. It would have been better to identify AOCs with the best practices and standardize a proven setup. I admire his advocacy for use of open source software, but his primary pitch is a reduction of costs. Any organization that switches to open source for the purpose of promised dramatically reduced operating costs is fooling themselves. The true benefit of open source is much more than savings. |
|
|
I understood it the other way around: the bureaucracy was willing to pay the bill for the closed source options, thinking a large maintenance fee meant fast support. The author, on the other hand, wanted a system that would be more agile, with faster updates, easier maintenance and standards:
"it was horribly inefficient, a maintenance nightmare, not user friendly, and agility was measured in decades.
Our job was to take that mess and fix it. The idea was to build a standard hardware and software platform [...]."
So, as I understand it, easier work for him and his team and indirectly lowering the barrier of entry for future vendors, allowing more competition or a way to fix things themselves. Pretty much the true benefits of open source if you ask me.