UK really gets FOSS

The United Kingdom has put out an Action Plan to make use of Open Source and Open Standards. Building on its 2004 policy, they report that FOSS usage has since increased specifically in web servers, NHS systems and Directgov components, they have also noticed that enterprise class OSS support services have grown, and the major IT players are now actively supporting FOSS and Open Standards. CIOs too are now more comfortable with FOSS as the FUD around cost, licensing and risks are now better understood and neutralised.

The business needs of wanting more re-use of existing IT assets, more transparency in the procurement process and a establishment of a valid IT ecosystem were also drivers in this decision. So its not just about licensing fees which governments can reap from adopting pro-FOSS policies.

What is important are the key points in The Way Forward. The UK govt recognises the importance in communications between the citizens on their adopted solutions, and the interop enabled by using Open Standards. Getting the best value for money is of course a priority. What is encouraging is their far sighted desire to strengthen the skills, experience and capabilities of both Govt and its suppliers. This is important as it will be true meritocracy in terms of appointing suppliers, whereby the govt have the know how in deciding who to contract, whilst the best supplier will always win. Previously it really depended on artificial business restrictions where only a select few would have the magical appointment of being the authorised distribution / reselling / service rights, or arbitrary licenses which determined whether a company was successful in winning contracts.

The collaborative process of sharing and re-use, which is intrinsic to FOSS, has been recognised by the UK govt, and they expect it to help stimulate innovation, reduce costs and risks and improve time to market. I'm not sure how well this can be implemented, but at least they have a structure, the CIO Council to handle this aspect of FOSS development.

"No procedural barriers to the adoption of FOSS" is a fantastic policy. This gives FOSS a fighting chance. Archaic requirements like "but we need 3 competitive quotations on the zero licensing fees" would now be things of the past.

What is even better is that UK is now imposing requirements on proprietary vendors, who have gotten away with for too long, that they will now have to "demonstrate the same flexibility and ability to re–use their solutions and products as is inherent in open source."

Leveraging FOSS to open up closed software is also a good thing.

In the Policy section, we read even better ideas. Infact we see an idea of calculating the Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) to its logical conclusion.

Procurement decisions will be made on the basis on the best value for money solution to the business requirement, taking account of total lifetime cost of ownership of the solution, including exit and transition costs, after ensuring that solutions fulfil minimum and essential capability, security, scalability, transferability, support and manageability requirements

To summarise:

TCO = license cost + (exit + transition) costs + security costs + transferable costs + support costs + manageability costs

This is where the real TCO of proprietary software will go sky high. For those vendors who love lock-ins, their exit/transition costs will be prohibitive. For those who have poor security or virus prone, you will be held accountable. Then for those suppliers who dictate user unfriendly EULAs which restrict transferability, well ... make it more consumer oriented, or die!

Where Malaysia succeeded in 2002 by having the FOSS preferential policy and dropping the ball in 2006 by removing it, the United Kingdom in 2008 have this clause:

Where there is no significant overall cost difference between open and non-open source products, open source will be selected on the basis of its additional inherent flexibility.

There you have it. Malaysia was there first ("In situations where advantages and disadvantages of OSS and proprietary software are equal, preference shall be given to OSS"), but due to her weak leadership, she lost it an now her prior colonial power succeeds. How sad. I wonder what the UK govt reaction would be when CompTIA and its (in)famous Institute for Software Choice (ISC) starts complaining about WTO / FTA / anti competitive issues on this item, as what had happened in Malaysia?

The document then becomes far more proactive in moving towards FOSS. They are now taking aggressive steps in avoiding proprietary lock-ins, and would rather "take exit, rebid and rebuild costs into account in procurement decisions and will require those proposing proprietary software to specify how exit would be achieved."

UK also demands for proprietary software to be transferable within Govt depts and to be purchased with volume discounts. This is fair as as a single entity, it is probably the largest customer for any country. In the Action Plans (#5), it states that the onus now is on the suppliers to provide proof that FOSS alternatives have been studied and rejected before proprietary products are considered. This is absolutely fantastic, where currently glossy brochures and substantial perceived discounts was all the vendor had to provide to pitch for a deal.

The policy on open standards does not say much, but in the Action Plans (#8) it specifically says that ODF (ISO 26300) is required for compliance. OOXML is also mentioned, but merely as "emerging open versions of previously proprietary standards" which is probably the most generous description Ive heard. Its quite clear that the "defacto" binary Microsoft Office docs and Macro enabled OOXML are out.

For its Re-Use plans, the UK govt finally understands why it is important to release as open source the software it has commissioned to develop.

As far as Government Policies go, this one to me is fantastic. There is no pie-in-the-sky rhetoric, no unnecessary jargon, no vague handwaving, but has solid action plans, sound reasons for adoption and projects a great vision. The way it exploits all of FOSS strengths and turns it against the current procurement processes which hugely favours proprietary products is just genius.

Malaysia had the opportunity to be the pioneer in FOSS in the government, this but with weak policy leaders, (looking at you, Minister of Science,) the FOSS phenomena could not be exploited. The news from UK however is inspiring and very encouraging. Many thanks to the folk who got that going! Kudos to Tom Watson, MP of West Bromwich East, Minister for Digital Engagement, and twitterable at @tom_watson.

yk

Comments

[Dinesh Nair]

dude,

i think you should submit this piece to an online publication or for publishing somewhere. it's a good piece, well said !