Discussion:
[OSGeo-Discuss] (no subject)
(too old to reply)
Steven Feldman
2017-03-25 17:06:59 UTC
Permalink
It is important to note that the cost of licences in a solution (i.e. something more than a simple desktop implementation) are only a part of the overall cost and in many cases, in my experience, a small part.

Implementation, customisation, integration, training, ongoing support, maintenance and hosting are the main costs regardless of whether the underlying software is proprietary or open source

My experience of selling to the public sector is that, on occasions, proprietary solutions have been lower cost than open source.

Steven


> On 24 Mar 2017, at 19:00, discuss-***@lists.osgeo.org wrote:
>
> Send Discuss mailing list submissions to
> ***@lists.osgeo.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> discuss-***@lists.osgeo.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> discuss-***@lists.osgeo.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Discuss digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
> properitery product as Open ? (Suchith Anand)
> 2. Re: Wiki: InfrastructurePreferencesStatusQuo - call for
> update (Vicky Vergara)
> 3. Ideas for the building global research agenda for Geospatial
> Data Science (Suchith Anand)
> 4. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
> properitery product as Open? (Steven Feldman)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 21:51:53 +0000
> From: Suchith Anand <***@nottingham.ac.uk>
> To: María Arias de Reyna <delawen+***@gmail.com>, Luí­s Moreira
> de Sousa <***@protonmail.ch>
> Cc: "***@lists.osgeo.org" <***@lists.osgeo.org>
> Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor
> to market thier properitery product as Open ?
> Message-ID:
> <***@HE1PR0602MB2793.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> +1 .
>
>
> I am also interested in how we can protect taxpayers money in this. The need for cost savings by using Open source GIS software will help the local authorities and various government departments across Europe in reducing huge licence fee costs for proprietary software and Government and taxpayers as a whole will benefit from cost efficiencies, reduce the cost of lock-in to suppliers and products. This is especially important for future IT investments (for example Cloud Computing) , so that more options are explored and choices available. I presented my ideas on the importance of having a National level strategy for Open Principles in Geospatial [1] . Overview slides are at https://www.slideshare.net/SuchithAnand/national-level-strategy-for-open-principles-in-geospatial
>
>
>
> It is my duty as a global citizen to work on this so that all our future generations are empowered fully. Let us plan to meet and discuss ideas at FOSS4G -Europe for making OSGeo European chapter.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Suchith
>
>
>
> [1] http://opensourcegeospatial.icaci.org/2016/03/national-level-strategy-for-open-principles-in-geospatial-ideas-and-inputs-needed/
>
> ________________________________________
> From: Discuss <discuss-***@lists.osgeo.org> on behalf of María Arias de Reyna <delawen+***@gmail.com>
> Sent: 23 March 2017 9:20 AM
> To: Luí­s Moreira de Sousa
> Cc: ***@lists.osgeo.org
> Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier properitery product as Open ?
>
> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 9:30 AM, Luí­s Moreira de Sousa <***@protonmail.ch<mailto:***@protonmail.ch>> wrote:
>
> I believe we need a regulatory framework for "open source" labelling; something like the EU regulation 1169/2011 [2] for organic farming. It not only sets the criteria for farmers to label their products, as it actively prevents others from falsely claiming to that criteria.
>
>
> +1 Restarting the movement for the european chapter to be able to lobby for this...
>
>
>
>
> This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee
> and may contain confidential information. If you have received this
> message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it.
>
> Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this
> message or in any attachment. Any views or opinions expressed by the
> author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the
> University of Nottingham.
>
> This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
> attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your
> computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email
> communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as
> permitted by UK legislation.
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20170323/b5c26dd4/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 19:12:47 -0600
> From: Vicky Vergara <***@georepublic.de>
> To: OSGeo Discuss list <***@lists.osgeo.org>
> Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Wiki: InfrastructurePreferencesStatusQuo
> - call for update
> Message-ID:
> <CAK_FzuVEcFLgyxKiML8-***@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Added a line for pgRouting
>
> On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 2:14 PM, Cameron Shorter <***@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> +1 Greatly insightful slide deck from Maxi about Open principles in
>> general and OSGeo in particular. Thanks for sharing.
>>
>> Cameron
>>
>> On 22/3/17 4:02 am, Jody Garnett wrote:
>>
>> That is a *great* talk, and shows a lot of areas where we can improve.
>>
>> There has been a consistent call for "incubation" to continue to hold
>> projects accountable to OSGeo standards. I have resisted these calls as I
>> view incubation as an outreach activity - part of our mission to promote
>> open/transparent software development.
>>
>> Still that is great to have an external review; is that review public?
>>
>> --
>> Jody Garnett
>>
>> On 21 March 2017 at 01:18, Venkatesh Raghavan <
>> ***@media.osaka-cu.ac.jp> wrote:
>>
>>> Maxi also made an excelling presentation on related topic
>>> at FOSS4G-Asia 2017. The presentation is available at
>>>
>>> http://www.slideshare.net/cannata/massimiliano-cannata-keyno
>>> te-foss4gasia-2017
>>>
>>> Best
>>>
>>> Venka
>>>
>>>> On 2017/03/20 22:08, Jeff McKenna wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Actually Maxi and I did a recent thorough research into OSGeo project
>>>> use of infrastructure, by each project, and it was published as a paper (or
>>>> soon to be). In the short term I know Maxi has submitted it as a talk for
>>>> FOSS4G-Europe. It's good to take a step back and review old processes.
>>>> Actually we hope that that was a start of a regular OSGeo project 'health
>>>> checkup', which obviously is very needed. For example, it was quite
>>>> shocking how many current OSGeo projects are functioning without any
>>>> regular Project Steering Committee meetings, or even a visible Project
>>>> Steering Committee. I am sure Maxi will be sharing those results at
>>>> FOSS4G-E.
>>>>
>>>> -jeff
>>>>
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Discuss mailing list
>>> ***@lists.osgeo.org
>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Discuss mailing ***@lists.osgeo.orghttps://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>
>>
>> --
>> Cameron Shorter
>> M +61 419 142 254
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Discuss mailing list
>> ***@lists.osgeo.org
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Georepublic UG (haftungsbeschränkt)
> Salzmannstraße 44,
> 81739 München, Germany
>
> Vicky Vergara
> Operations Research
>
> eMail: ***@georepublic.de
> Web: https://georepublic.info
>
> Tel: +49 (089) 4161 7698-1
> Fax: +49 (089) 4161 7698-9
>
> Commercial register: Amtsgericht München, HRB 181428
> CEO: Daniel Kastl
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20170323/1a31400c/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 11:05:12 +0000
> From: Suchith Anand <***@nottingham.ac.uk>
> To: "***@lists.osgeo.org" <***@lists.osgeo.org>,
> "***@lists.osgeo.org" <***@lists.osgeo.org>
> Subject: [OSGeo-Discuss] Ideas for the building global research agenda
> for Geospatial Data Science
> Message-ID:
> <***@HE1PR0602MB2793.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Dear colleague,
>
> The Geospatial IG of the Research Data Alliance will be meeting in Barcelona on 5th April 2017 to keep building ideas for the global research agenda for Geospatial Data Science.I am pleased to send the final meeting agenda and invite all interested to join.
>
> The meeting objectives are to :
>
> * Discussions on Geospatial Data Science - Vision 2030 [1]
> * Plan next steps from OpenCitySmart and UrbanGeoBigData [2]
>
> * Ideas for Education programs for Geospatial Data Science
>
> * Discuss Ideas for starting new WGs in Transport Data
>
> Meeting agenda
>
> This meeting aims to build upon our previous meetings and draft agenda below
>
> * Updates on Geospatial IG - Suchith Anand (GODAN/University of Nottingham)
> * Discussions on new WG in Transport Data that is in progress - Beth Zeitler (Millennium Challenge Corporation, USA)
> * Coverage: Standards for Big Earth Data - Peter Baumann (Jacobs University)
> * Enabling the re-use of spatial information across domains - Andrea Perego (JRC, European Commission)
> * Copernicus EU Programme - Andrea Perego (JRC, European Commission)
> * Joint W3C/OGC Spatial Data on the Web WG - Andrea Perego (JRC, European Commission)
> * Discussions on Geospatial Data Science - Vision 2030 - chaired by Suchith Anand (GODAN/University of Nottingham)
> * The Rise of OpenStreetMap as a World Mapping Agency [3] - discussions chaired by Suchith Anand (GODAN/University of Nottingham)
> * NASA Europa Challenge 2017 and OpenCitySmart updates - Suchith Anand (GODAN/University of Nottingham)
>
> * Updates on Capacity Development from IGAD meeting - Suchith Anand (GODAN/University of Nottingham)
>
> * Ideas/updates on Training programs for Geospatial Data Science - All
> * Ideas for specific actions /new WGs in Geospatial IG - All
>
> There will be gotomeeting facility for those interested to join remotely. I am waiting for the RDA hosts to send me the details of this and it will updated in the main website at
> https://www.rd-alliance.org/ig-geospatial-rda-9th-plenary-meeting
>
> I look forward to welcome you all for productive discussions and actions for building the global research agenda for Geospatial Data Science.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Suchith
>
>
>
> [1] http://www.geoconnexion.com/uploads/publication_pdfs/uk_v15i18-058-059-Op951AF3.pdf
>
> [2] https://www.devex.com/news/how-nasa-and-the-un-are-using-location-intelligence-to-build-smart-cities-in-developing-countries-89721
> [3] http://opensourcegeospatial.icaci.org/2017/03/the-rise-of-openstreetmap-as-a-world-mapping-agency/
>
>
>
>
>
> This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee
> and may contain confidential information. If you have received this
> message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it.
>
> Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this
> message or in any attachment. Any views or opinions expressed by the
> author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the
> University of Nottingham.
>
> This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
> attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your
> computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email
> communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as
> permitted by UK legislation.
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20170324/bcb9f2fe/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 16:48:20 +0000
> From: Steven Feldman <***@gmail.com>
> To: OSGeo Discussions <***@lists.osgeo.org>
> Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor
> to market thier properitery product as Open?
> Message-ID: <DA3DA905-6C65-4D42-A9F9-***@gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> I wanted to respond to Suchith’s query but I found the strength and length of my thoughts to be too much to include in an email. I was also keen to share them with a wider audience than the regulars on this list.
>
> So if you are interested in my views on the use of the adjective ‘open’ you can read my post on "Esri isn’t evil” at http://knowwhereconsulting.co.uk/blog/esri-isnt-evil/ <http://knowwhereconsulting.co.uk/blog/esri-isnt-evil/>
>
> Feel free to rant at me in the comments section of my blog or back her on the list
>
> May the FOSS be with you
> ______
> Steven
>
>
>> On 23 Mar 2017, at 19:00, board-***@lists.osgeo.org wrote:
>>
>> Send Discuss mailing list submissions to
>> ***@lists.osgeo.org
>>
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>> discuss-***@lists.osgeo.org
>>
>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>> discuss-***@lists.osgeo.org
>>
>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>> than "Re: Contents of Discuss digest..."
>>
>>
>> Today's Topics:
>>
>> 1. Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
>> properitery product as Open ? (Suchith Anand)
>> 2. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
>> properitery product as Open ? (Jody Garnett)
>> 3. Re: Is it possible for proprietary GIS vendor to market their
>> proprietary product as Open ? (Hogan, Patrick (ARC-PX))
>> 4. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
>> properitery product as Open ? (Kiringai Kamau)
>> 5. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
>> properitery product as Open ? (María Arias de Reyna)
>> 6. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
>> properitery product as Open ? (María Arias de Reyna)
>> 7. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
>> properitery product as Open ? (María Arias de Reyna)
>> 8. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
>> properitery product as Open ? (Luí­s Moreira de Sousa)
>> 9. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
>> properitery product as Open ? (María Arias de Reyna)
>> 10. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
>> properitery product as Open ? (James Klassen)
>> 11. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
>> properitery product as Open ? (Jody Garnett)
>> 12. Re: GRASS GIS video from 1987: 30th anniversary blog post /
>> link (Jeff McKenna)
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2017 20:15:27 +0000
>> From: Suchith Anand <***@nottingham.ac.uk>
>> To: "***@lists.osgeo.org" <***@lists.osgeo.org>,
>> "***@lists.osgeo.org" <***@lists.osgeo.org>
>> Subject: [OSGeo-Discuss] Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to
>> market thier properitery product as Open ?
>> Message-ID:
>> <***@HE1PR0602MB2793.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com>
>>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>>
>> I have a query. If a properitery GIS vendor starts marketing thier properitery products as Open platform and software then what rights do the organisations and customers have who are mislead buying the properitery software thinking it is open have ? The definision of Proprietary software [1] is very clearly defined, so how can it be possible for any properitery GIS vendor to market their software knowingly as open platform if it is properitery?
>>
>>
>> This also greatly affects the business and revenues of true open source software companies . Who is responsible for any misleading marketing that results in losses to both customers who are mislead to buy the properitery software thinking it is open and also to other companies who do true open source business who lose out on the business opportunities? Is it right business ethics to do this?
>>
>>
>> Best wishes,
>>
>> Suchith
>>
>>
>> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proprietary_software
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20170324/be45add5/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> ***@lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of Discuss Digest, Vol 123, Issue 22
> ****************************************
Suchith Anand
2017-03-26 06:53:36 UTC
Permalink
Hi Steven,

Thank you for your email and information. I am an educator and researcher. I have zero knowledge or expertise in software sales or software procurement .I do not know the answers but i am sure by harnessing the collective wisdom of the community we will be able find the best ideas for bringing down high cost of GIS software procurement for governments for cost savings of tax payer money and create innovation opportunities for all.

There needs to be detailed study on how we can bring down high GIS software costs for govenments worldwide . Governments are are one of the biggest spenders and it is all hardworking taxpayers money from cleaners to teachers, hence it is important to think of cost savings . My gut feeling is if there are open and transparent procurement systems and lot of competition (no vendor monopolies), then GIS software implementation costs will come down and also create lot of innovation and value added opportunities for big companies as well as SMEs. There need to be best practice sharing globally. For example i am interested to understand more about gvSIG ecosystem[1] in Spain and other similar examples . gvSIG didn't create any Billionaires or multi Billionaires (that was not its purpose) but it did create lot of innovation , helped local governments , created thousands of jobs and a vibrant ecosystem and community. More importanly for me, it helped create gvSIG Batovi which went on to provide high quality spatial education opportunities for millions of poor students in Uruguay and other countries.

I know good examples of large scale IT projects done with low cost in my state Kerala in India ( we are a developing country with lot of resource constraints ). For example ***@School project [1] (which is World’s largest simultaneous deployment of FOSS based ICT education). It is running for over a decade now benifitting over 12,000 schools, about 60 lakh students, 6 million students and 200000 teachers.There are costs for implementation, customisation (we have local language- Malayalam), integration, training, ongoing support, maintenance and it is all done locally and innovation ecosystems have been created locally. More importantly we can scale this up easily to millions of schools as needed and there is no fear of vendor lock -in. Thank God that major software vendors or sellers didn't get involved in this!

So as i told my knowledge in this is very limited, so i am depending on experts like you to help guide me.

Best wishes,

Suchith

[1] http://www.gvsig.com/


[2] https://itschool.gov.in/glance.php

________________________________________
From: Discuss <discuss-***@lists.osgeo.org> on behalf of Steven Feldman <***@gmail.com>
Sent: 25 March 2017 5:06 PM
To: ***@lists.osgeo.org
Subject: [OSGeo-Discuss] (no subject)

It is important to note that the cost of licences in a solution (i.e. something more than a simple desktop implementation) are only a part of the overall cost and in many cases, in my experience, a small part.

Implementation, customisation, integration, training, ongoing support, maintenance and hosting are the main costs regardless of whether the underlying software is proprietary or open source

My experience of selling to the public sector is that, on occasions, proprietary solutions have been lower cost than open source.

Steven


> On 24 Mar 2017, at 19:00, discuss-***@lists.osgeo.org wrote:
>
> Send Discuss mailing list submissions to
> ***@lists.osgeo.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> discuss-***@lists.osgeo.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> discuss-***@lists.osgeo.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Discuss digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
> properitery product as Open ? (Suchith Anand)
> 2. Re: Wiki: InfrastructurePreferencesStatusQuo - call for
> update (Vicky Vergara)
> 3. Ideas for the building global research agenda for Geospatial
> Data Science (Suchith Anand)
> 4. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
> properitery product as Open? (Steven Feldman)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 21:51:53 +0000
> From: Suchith Anand <***@nottingham.ac.uk>
> To: María Arias de Reyna <delawen+***@gmail.com>, Luí­s Moreira
> de Sousa <***@protonmail.ch>
> Cc: "***@lists.osgeo.org" <***@lists.osgeo.org>
> Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor
> to market thier properitery product as Open ?
> Message-ID:
> <***@HE1PR0602MB2793.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> +1 .
>
>
> I am also interested in how we can protect taxpayers money in this. The need for cost savings by using Open source GIS software will help the local authorities and various government departments across Europe in reducing huge licence fee costs for proprietary software and Government and taxpayers as a whole will benefit from cost efficiencies, reduce the cost of lock-in to suppliers and products. This is especially important for future IT investments (for example Cloud Computing) , so that more options are explored and choices available. I presented my ideas on the importance of having a National level strategy for Open Principles in Geospatial [1] . Overview slides are at https://www.slideshare.net/SuchithAnand/national-level-strategy-for-open-principles-in-geospatial
>
>
>
> It is my duty as a global citizen to work on this so that all our future generations are empowered fully. Let us plan to meet and discuss ideas at FOSS4G -Europe for making OSGeo European chapter.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Suchith
>
>
>
> [1] http://opensourcegeospatial.icaci.org/2016/03/national-level-strategy-for-open-principles-in-geospatial-ideas-and-inputs-needed/
>
> ________________________________________
> From: Discuss <discuss-***@lists.osgeo.org> on behalf of María Arias de Reyna <delawen+***@gmail.com>
> Sent: 23 March 2017 9:20 AM
> To: Luí­s Moreira de Sousa
> Cc: ***@lists.osgeo.org
> Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier properitery product as Open ?
>
> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 9:30 AM, Luí­s Moreira de Sousa <***@protonmail.ch<mailto:***@protonmail.ch>> wrote:
>
> I believe we need a regulatory framework for "open source" labelling; something like the EU regulation 1169/2011 [2] for organic farming. It not only sets the criteria for farmers to label their products, as it actively prevents others from falsely claiming to that criteria.
>
>
> +1 Restarting the movement for the european chapter to be able to lobby for this...
>
>
>
>
> This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee
> and may contain confidential information. If you have received this
> message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it.
>
> Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this
> message or in any attachment. Any views or opinions expressed by the
> author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the
> University of Nottingham.
>
> This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
> attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your
> computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email
> communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as
> permitted by UK legislation.
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20170323/b5c26dd4/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 19:12:47 -0600
> From: Vicky Vergara <***@georepublic.de>
> To: OSGeo Discuss list <***@lists.osgeo.org>
> Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Wiki: InfrastructurePreferencesStatusQuo
> - call for update
> Message-ID:
> <CAK_FzuVEcFLgyxKiML8-***@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Added a line for pgRouting
>
> On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 2:14 PM, Cameron Shorter <***@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> +1 Greatly insightful slide deck from Maxi about Open principles in
>> general and OSGeo in particular. Thanks for sharing.
>>
>> Cameron
>>
>> On 22/3/17 4:02 am, Jody Garnett wrote:
>>
>> That is a *great* talk, and shows a lot of areas where we can improve.
>>
>> There has been a consistent call for "incubation" to continue to hold
>> projects accountable to OSGeo standards. I have resisted these calls as I
>> view incubation as an outreach activity - part of our mission to promote
>> open/transparent software development.
>>
>> Still that is great to have an external review; is that review public?
>>
>> --
>> Jody Garnett
>>
>> On 21 March 2017 at 01:18, Venkatesh Raghavan <
>> ***@media.osaka-cu.ac.jp> wrote:
>>
>>> Maxi also made an excelling presentation on related topic
>>> at FOSS4G-Asia 2017. The presentation is available at
>>>
>>> http://www.slideshare.net/cannata/massimiliano-cannata-keyno
>>> te-foss4gasia-2017
>>>
>>> Best
>>>
>>> Venka
>>>
>>>> On 2017/03/20 22:08, Jeff McKenna wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Actually Maxi and I did a recent thorough research into OSGeo project
>>>> use of infrastructure, by each project, and it was published as a paper (or
>>>> soon to be). In the short term I know Maxi has submitted it as a talk for
>>>> FOSS4G-Europe. It's good to take a step back and review old processes.
>>>> Actually we hope that that was a start of a regular OSGeo project 'health
>>>> checkup', which obviously is very needed. For example, it was quite
>>>> shocking how many current OSGeo projects are functioning without any
>>>> regular Project Steering Committee meetings, or even a visible Project
>>>> Steering Committee. I am sure Maxi will be sharing those results at
>>>> FOSS4G-E.
>>>>
>>>> -jeff
>>>>
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Discuss mailing list
>>> ***@lists.osgeo.org
>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Discuss mailing ***@lists.osgeo.orghttps://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>
>>
>> --
>> Cameron Shorter
>> M +61 419 142 254
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Discuss mailing list
>> ***@lists.osgeo.org
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Georepublic UG (haftungsbeschränkt)
> Salzmannstraße 44,
> 81739 München, Germany
>
> Vicky Vergara
> Operations Research
>
> eMail: ***@georepublic.de
> Web: https://georepublic.info
>
> Tel: +49 (089) 4161 7698-1
> Fax: +49 (089) 4161 7698-9
>
> Commercial register: Amtsgericht München, HRB 181428
> CEO: Daniel Kastl
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20170323/1a31400c/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 11:05:12 +0000
> From: Suchith Anand <***@nottingham.ac.uk>
> To: "***@lists.osgeo.org" <***@lists.osgeo.org>,
> "***@lists.osgeo.org" <***@lists.osgeo.org>
> Subject: [OSGeo-Discuss] Ideas for the building global research agenda
> for Geospatial Data Science
> Message-ID:
> <***@HE1PR0602MB2793.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Dear colleague,
>
> The Geospatial IG of the Research Data Alliance will be meeting in Barcelona on 5th April 2017 to keep building ideas for the global research agenda for Geospatial Data Science.I am pleased to send the final meeting agenda and invite all interested to join.
>
> The meeting objectives are to :
>
> * Discussions on Geospatial Data Science - Vision 2030 [1]
> * Plan next steps from OpenCitySmart and UrbanGeoBigData [2]
>
> * Ideas for Education programs for Geospatial Data Science
>
> * Discuss Ideas for starting new WGs in Transport Data
>
> Meeting agenda
>
> This meeting aims to build upon our previous meetings and draft agenda below
>
> * Updates on Geospatial IG - Suchith Anand (GODAN/University of Nottingham)
> * Discussions on new WG in Transport Data that is in progress - Beth Zeitler (Millennium Challenge Corporation, USA)
> * Coverage: Standards for Big Earth Data - Peter Baumann (Jacobs University)
> * Enabling the re-use of spatial information across domains - Andrea Perego (JRC, European Commission)
> * Copernicus EU Programme - Andrea Perego (JRC, European Commission)
> * Joint W3C/OGC Spatial Data on the Web WG - Andrea Perego (JRC, European Commission)
> * Discussions on Geospatial Data Science - Vision 2030 - chaired by Suchith Anand (GODAN/University of Nottingham)
> * The Rise of OpenStreetMap as a World Mapping Agency [3] - discussions chaired by Suchith Anand (GODAN/University of Nottingham)
> * NASA Europa Challenge 2017 and OpenCitySmart updates - Suchith Anand (GODAN/University of Nottingham)
>
> * Updates on Capacity Development from IGAD meeting - Suchith Anand (GODAN/University of Nottingham)
>
> * Ideas/updates on Training programs for Geospatial Data Science - All
> * Ideas for specific actions /new WGs in Geospatial IG - All
>
> There will be gotomeeting facility for those interested to join remotely. I am waiting for the RDA hosts to send me the details of this and it will updated in the main website at
> https://www.rd-alliance.org/ig-geospatial-rda-9th-plenary-meeting
>
> I look forward to welcome you all for productive discussions and actions for building the global research agenda for Geospatial Data Science.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Suchith
>
>
>
> [1] http://www.geoconnexion.com/uploads/publication_pdfs/uk_v15i18-058-059-Op951AF3.pdf
>
> [2] https://www.devex.com/news/how-nasa-and-the-un-are-using-location-intelligence-to-build-smart-cities-in-developing-countries-89721
> [3] http://opensourcegeospatial.icaci.org/2017/03/the-rise-of-openstreetmap-as-a-world-mapping-agency/
>
>
>
>
>
> This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee
> and may contain confidential information. If you have received this
> message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it.
>
> Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this
> message or in any attachment. Any views or opinions expressed by the
> author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the
> University of Nottingham.
>
> This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
> attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your
> computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email
> communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as
> permitted by UK legislation.
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20170324/bcb9f2fe/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 16:48:20 +0000
> From: Steven Feldman <***@gmail.com>
> To: OSGeo Discussions <***@lists.osgeo.org>
> Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor
> to market thier properitery product as Open?
> Message-ID: <DA3DA905-6C65-4D42-A9F9-***@gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> I wanted to respond to Suchith’s query but I found the strength and length of my thoughts to be too much to include in an email. I was also keen to share them with a wider audience than the regulars on this list.
>
> So if you are interested in my views on the use of the adjective ‘open’ you can read my post on "Esri isn’t evil” at http://knowwhereconsulting.co.uk/blog/esri-isnt-evil/ <http://knowwhereconsulting.co.uk/blog/esri-isnt-evil/>
>
> Feel free to rant at me in the comments section of my blog or back her on the list
>
> May the FOSS be with you
> ______
> Steven
>
>
>> On 23 Mar 2017, at 19:00, board-***@lists.osgeo.org wrote:
>>
>> Send Discuss mailing list submissions to
>> ***@lists.osgeo.org
>>
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>> discuss-***@lists.osgeo.org
>>
>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>> discuss-***@lists.osgeo.org
>>
>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>> than "Re: Contents of Discuss digest..."
>>
>>
>> Today's Topics:
>>
>> 1. Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
>> properitery product as Open ? (Suchith Anand)
>> 2. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
>> properitery product as Open ? (Jody Garnett)
>> 3. Re: Is it possible for proprietary GIS vendor to market their
>> proprietary product as Open ? (Hogan, Patrick (ARC-PX))
>> 4. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
>> properitery product as Open ? (Kiringai Kamau)
>> 5. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
>> properitery product as Open ? (María Arias de Reyna)
>> 6. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
>> properitery product as Open ? (María Arias de Reyna)
>> 7. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
>> properitery product as Open ? (María Arias de Reyna)
>> 8. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
>> properitery product as Open ? (Luí­s Moreira de Sousa)
>> 9. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
>> properitery product as Open ? (María Arias de Reyna)
>> 10. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
>> properitery product as Open ? (James Klassen)
>> 11. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
>> properitery product as Open ? (Jody Garnett)
>> 12. Re: GRASS GIS video from 1987: 30th anniversary blog post /
>> link (Jeff McKenna)
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2017 20:15:27 +0000
>> From: Suchith Anand <***@nottingham.ac.uk>
>> To: "***@lists.osgeo.org" <***@lists.osgeo.org>,
>> "***@lists.osgeo.org" <***@lists.osgeo.org>
>> Subject: [OSGeo-Discuss] Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to
>> market thier properitery product as Open ?
>> Message-ID:
>> <***@HE1PR0602MB2793.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com>
>>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>>
>> I have a query. If a properitery GIS vendor starts marketing thier properitery products as Open platform and software then what rights do the organisations and customers have who are mislead buying the properitery software thinking it is open have ? The definision of Proprietary software [1] is very clearly defined, so how can it be possible for any properitery GIS vendor to market their software knowingly as open platform if it is properitery?
>>
>>
>> This also greatly affects the business and revenues of true open source software companies . Who is responsible for any misleading marketing that results in losses to both customers who are mislead to buy the properitery software thinking it is open and also to other companies who do true open source business who lose out on the business opportunities? Is it right business ethics to do this?
>>
>>
>> Best wishes,
>>
>> Suchith
>>
>>
>> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proprietary_software
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20170324/be45add5/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> ***@lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of Discuss Digest, Vol 123, Issue 22
> ****************************************
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
***@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss




This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee
and may contain confidential information. If you have received this
message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it.

Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this
message or in any attachment. Any views or opinions expressed by the
author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the
University of Nottingham.

This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your
computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email
communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as
permitted by UK legislation.
Steven Feldman
2017-03-26 17:29:34 UTC
Permalink
Suchith

You mention "high cost of GIS software procurement for governments”. I am not sure how you are measuring this “high” cost and against what? For most local government bodies (in the developed world) I would expect the cost of GI software to be 0.1% to 0.2% of total budget and less for a central government department. I don’t consider this to be “high” but of course as taxpayers many of us would like expenditure to be lower whether it is on software or people or ...

My experience of procurement is based on the UK but probably applies to much of Europe. All but the smallest procurements are governed by EU regulations and are pretty testing for vendors (regardless of whether they offer proprietary or open source solutions) and have a high degree of transparency and fairness. Typically cost will be one of the two main criteria on which bids are evaluated, the other being quality.

The gvSIG community is impressive, on what do you base "created thousands of jobs”? That is more than I estimated for the whole FOSS4G ecosystem last year.

I agree that in circumstances where an organisation wants to deploy thousands of desktops, an open source GI desktop may well save money compared to the cost of a proprietary licensed product particularly if the organisation can provide training and support from internal resources. This could be the case in the education sector. But, and this is a big but most government departments are moving away from desktop GI to server based solutions and in those circumstances the costs of implementation, integration, support and hosting will substantially exceed any costs of licenses.

I spend much of my working time advocating and marketing open source GI and, in the past, I have also built a very successful business based on proprietary software. The choices that customers make are based on a wide range of criteria, there is no one right choice and it is a misunderstanding of sophisticated buyers to suggest that they have in some way been mislead by vendors whether they are proprietary or open source.

Let’s grow the usage of Open Source GI through positive advocacy of its benefits, investment of time and money in high quality marketing and an understanding of and respect for the strengths of our competitors.

Best
______
Steven


> On 26 Mar 2017, at 07:53, Suchith Anand <***@nottingham.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> Hi Steven,
>
> Thank you for your email and information. I am an educator and researcher. I have zero knowledge or expertise in software sales or software procurement .I do not know the answers but i am sure by harnessing the collective wisdom of the community we will be able find the best ideas for bringing down high cost of GIS software procurement for governments for cost savings of tax payer money and create innovation opportunities for all.
>
> There needs to be detailed study on how we can bring down high GIS software costs for govenments worldwide . Governments are are one of the biggest spenders and it is all hardworking taxpayers money from cleaners to teachers, hence it is important to think of cost savings . My gut feeling is if there are open and transparent procurement systems and lot of competition (no vendor monopolies), then GIS software implementation costs will come down and also create lot of innovation and value added opportunities for big companies as well as SMEs. There need to be best practice sharing globally. For example i am interested to understand more about gvSIG ecosystem[1] in Spain and other similar examples . gvSIG didn't create any Billionaires or multi Billionaires (that was not its purpose) but it did create lot of innovation , helped local governments , created thousands of jobs and a vibrant ecosystem and community. More importanly for me, it helped create gvSIG Batovi which went on to provide high quality spatial education opportunities for millions of poor students in Uruguay and other countries.
>
> I know good examples of large scale IT projects done with low cost in my state Kerala in India ( we are a developing country with lot of resource constraints ). For example ***@School project [1] (which is World’s largest simultaneous deployment of FOSS based ICT education). It is running for over a decade now benifitting over 12,000 schools, about 60 lakh students, 6 million students and 200000 teachers.There are costs for implementation, customisation (we have local language- Malayalam), integration, training, ongoing support, maintenance and it is all done locally and innovation ecosystems have been created locally. More importantly we can scale this up easily to millions of schools as needed and there is no fear of vendor lock -in. Thank God that major software vendors or sellers didn't get involved in this!
>
> So as i told my knowledge in this is very limited, so i am depending on experts like you to help guide me.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Suchith
>
> [1] http://www.gvsig.com/ <http://www.gvsig.com/>
>
> [2] https://itschool.gov.in/glance.php <https://itschool.gov.in/glance.php>
> ________________________________________
> From: Discuss <discuss-***@lists.osgeo.org <mailto:discuss-***@lists.osgeo.org>> on behalf of Steven Feldman <***@gmail.com <mailto:***@gmail.com>>
> Sent: 25 March 2017 5:06 PM
> To: ***@lists.osgeo.org <mailto:***@lists.osgeo.org>
> Subject: [OSGeo-Discuss] (no subject)
>
> It is important to note that the cost of licences in a solution (i.e. something more than a simple desktop implementation) are only a part of the overall cost and in many cases, in my experience, a small part.
>
> Implementation, customisation, integration, training, ongoing support, maintenance and hosting are the main costs regardless of whether the underlying software is proprietary or open source
>
> My experience of selling to the public sector is that, on occasions, proprietary solutions have been lower cost than open source.
>
> Steven
>
>
> > On 24 Mar 2017, at 19:00, discuss-***@lists.osgeo.org <mailto:discuss-***@lists.osgeo.org> wrote:
> >
> > Send Discuss mailing list submissions to
> > ***@lists.osgeo.org <mailto:***@lists.osgeo.org>
> >
> > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss <https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>
> > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> > discuss-***@lists.osgeo.org <mailto:discuss-***@lists.osgeo.org>
> >
> > You can reach the person managing the list at
> > discuss-***@lists.osgeo.org <mailto:discuss-***@lists.osgeo.org>
> >
> > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> > than "Re: Contents of Discuss digest..."
> >
> >
> > Today's Topics:
> >
> > 1. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
> > properitery product as Open ? (Suchith Anand)
> > 2. Re: Wiki: InfrastructurePreferencesStatusQuo - call for
> > update (Vicky Vergara)
> > 3. Ideas for the building global research agenda for Geospatial
> > Data Science (Suchith Anand)
> > 4. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
> > properitery product as Open? (Steven Feldman)
> >
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Message: 1
> > Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 21:51:53 +0000
> > From: Suchith Anand <***@nottingham.ac.uk <mailto:***@nottingham.ac.uk>>
> > To: María Arias de Reyna <delawen+***@gmail.com <mailto:delawen+***@gmail.com>>, Luí­s Moreira
> > de Sousa <***@protonmail.ch <mailto:***@protonmail.ch>>
> > Cc: "***@lists.osgeo.org <mailto:***@lists.osgeo.org>" <***@lists.osgeo.org <mailto:***@lists.osgeo.org>>
> > Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor
> > to market thier properitery product as Open ?
> > Message-ID:
> > <***@HE1PR0602MB2793.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com <mailto:***@HE1PR0602MB2793.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com>>
> >
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> >
> > +1 .
> >
> >
> > I am also interested in how we can protect taxpayers money in this. The need for cost savings by using Open source GIS software will help the local authorities and various government departments across Europe in reducing huge licence fee costs for proprietary software and Government and taxpayers as a whole will benefit from cost efficiencies, reduce the cost of lock-in to suppliers and products. This is especially important for future IT investments (for example Cloud Computing) , so that more options are explored and choices available. I presented my ideas on the importance of having a National level strategy for Open Principles in Geospatial [1] . Overview slides are at https://www.slideshare.net/SuchithAnand/national-level-strategy-for-open-principles-in-geospatial <https://www.slideshare.net/SuchithAnand/national-level-strategy-for-open-principles-in-geospatial>
> >
> >
> >
> > It is my duty as a global citizen to work on this so that all our future generations are empowered fully. Let us plan to meet and discuss ideas at FOSS4G -Europe for making OSGeo European chapter.
> >
> > Best wishes,
> >
> > Suchith
> >
> >
> >
> > [1] http://opensourcegeospatial.icaci.org/2016/03/national-level-strategy-for-open-principles-in-geospatial-ideas-and-inputs-needed/ <http://opensourcegeospatial.icaci.org/2016/03/national-level-strategy-for-open-principles-in-geospatial-ideas-and-inputs-needed/>
> >
> > ________________________________________
> > From: Discuss <discuss-***@lists.osgeo.org <mailto:discuss-***@lists.osgeo.org>> on behalf of María Arias de Reyna <delawen+***@gmail.com <mailto:delawen+***@gmail.com>>
> > Sent: 23 March 2017 9:20 AM
> > To: Luí­s Moreira de Sousa
> > Cc: ***@lists.osgeo.org <mailto:***@lists.osgeo.org>
> > Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier properitery product as Open ?
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 9:30 AM, Luí­s Moreira de Sousa <***@protonmail.ch <mailto:***@protonmail.ch><mailto:***@protonmail.ch <mailto:***@protonmail.ch>>> wrote:
> >
> > I believe we need a regulatory framework for "open source" labelling; something like the EU regulation 1169/2011 [2] for organic farming. It not only sets the criteria for farmers to label their products, as it actively prevents others from falsely claiming to that criteria.
> >
> >
> > +1 Restarting the movement for the european chapter to be able to lobby for this...
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee
> > and may contain confidential information. If you have received this
> > message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it.
> >
> > Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this
> > message or in any attachment. Any views or opinions expressed by the
> > author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the
> > University of Nottingham.
> >
> > This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
> > attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your
> > computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email
> > communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as
> > permitted by UK legislation.
> >
> > -------------- next part --------------
> > An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> > URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20170323/b5c26dd4/attachment-0001.html <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20170323/b5c26dd4/attachment-0001.html>>
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > Message: 2
> > Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 19:12:47 -0600
> > From: Vicky Vergara <***@georepublic.de <mailto:***@georepublic.de>>
> > To: OSGeo Discuss list <***@lists.osgeo.org <mailto:***@lists.osgeo.org>>
> > Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Wiki: InfrastructurePreferencesStatusQuo
> > - call for update
> > Message-ID:
> > <CAK_FzuVEcFLgyxKiML8-***@mail.gmail.com <mailto:CAK_FzuVEcFLgyxKiML8-***@mail.gmail.com>>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> >
> > Added a line for pgRouting
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 2:14 PM, Cameron Shorter <***@gmail.com <mailto:***@gmail.com>>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> +1 Greatly insightful slide deck from Maxi about Open principles in
> >> general and OSGeo in particular. Thanks for sharing.
> >>
> >> Cameron
> >>
> >> On 22/3/17 4:02 am, Jody Garnett wrote:
> >>
> >> That is a *great* talk, and shows a lot of areas where we can improve.
> >>
> >> There has been a consistent call for "incubation" to continue to hold
> >> projects accountable to OSGeo standards. I have resisted these calls as I
> >> view incubation as an outreach activity - part of our mission to promote
> >> open/transparent software development.
> >>
> >> Still that is great to have an external review; is that review public?
> >>
> >> --
> >> Jody Garnett
> >>
> >> On 21 March 2017 at 01:18, Venkatesh Raghavan <
> >> ***@media.osaka-cu.ac.jp <mailto:***@media.osaka-cu.ac.jp>> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Maxi also made an excelling presentation on related topic
> >>> at FOSS4G-Asia 2017. The presentation is available at
> >>>
> >>> http://www.slideshare.net/cannata/massimiliano-cannata-keyno <http://www.slideshare.net/cannata/massimiliano-cannata-keyno>
> >>> te-foss4gasia-2017
> >>>
> >>> Best
> >>>
> >>> Venka
> >>>
> >>>> On 2017/03/20 22:08, Jeff McKenna wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Actually Maxi and I did a recent thorough research into OSGeo project
> >>>> use of infrastructure, by each project, and it was published as a paper (or
> >>>> soon to be). In the short term I know Maxi has submitted it as a talk for
> >>>> FOSS4G-Europe. It's good to take a step back and review old processes.
> >>>> Actually we hope that that was a start of a regular OSGeo project 'health
> >>>> checkup', which obviously is very needed. For example, it was quite
> >>>> shocking how many current OSGeo projects are functioning without any
> >>>> regular Project Steering Committee meetings, or even a visible Project
> >>>> Steering Committee. I am sure Maxi will be sharing those results at
> >>>> FOSS4G-E.
> >>>>
> >>>> -jeff
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Discuss mailing list
> >>> ***@lists.osgeo.org <mailto:***@lists.osgeo.org>
> >>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss <https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Discuss mailing ***@lists.osgeo.orghttps <mailto:***@lists.osgeo.orghttps>://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Cameron Shorter
> >> M +61 419 142 254
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Discuss mailing list
> >> ***@lists.osgeo.org <mailto:***@lists.osgeo.org>
> >> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss <https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Georepublic UG (haftungsbeschrÀnkt)
> > Salzmannstraße 44,
> > 81739 MÃŒnchen, Germany
> >
> > Vicky Vergara
> > Operations Research
> >
> > eMail: ***@georepublic.de <mailto:***@georepublic.de>
> > Web: https://georepublic.info <https://georepublic.info/>
> >
> > Tel: +49 (089) 4161 7698-1
> > Fax: +49 (089) 4161 7698-9
> >
> > Commercial register: Amtsgericht MÃŒnchen, HRB 181428
> > CEO: Daniel Kastl
> > -------------- next part --------------
> > An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> > URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20170323/1a31400c/attachment-0001.html <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20170323/1a31400c/attachment-0001.html>>
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > Message: 3
> > Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 11:05:12 +0000
> > From: Suchith Anand <***@nottingham.ac.uk <mailto:***@nottingham.ac.uk>>
> > To: "***@lists.osgeo.org <mailto:***@lists.osgeo.org>" <***@lists.osgeo.org <mailto:***@lists.osgeo.org>>,
> > "***@lists.osgeo.org <mailto:***@lists.osgeo.org>" <***@lists.osgeo.org <mailto:***@lists.osgeo.org>>
> > Subject: [OSGeo-Discuss] Ideas for the building global research agenda
> > for Geospatial Data Science
> > Message-ID:
> > <***@HE1PR0602MB2793.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com <mailto:***@HE1PR0602MB2793.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com>>
> >
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> >
> > Dear colleague,
> >
> > The Geospatial IG of the Research Data Alliance will be meeting in Barcelona on 5th April 2017 to keep building ideas for the global research agenda for Geospatial Data Science.I am pleased to send the final meeting agenda and invite all interested to join.
> >
> > The meeting objectives are to :
> >
> > * Discussions on Geospatial Data Science - Vision 2030 [1]
> > * Plan next steps from OpenCitySmart and UrbanGeoBigData [2]
> >
> > * Ideas for Education programs for Geospatial Data Science
> >
> > * Discuss Ideas for starting new WGs in Transport Data
> >
> > Meeting agenda
> >
> > This meeting aims to build upon our previous meetings and draft agenda below
> >
> > * Updates on Geospatial IG - Suchith Anand (GODAN/University of Nottingham)
> > * Discussions on new WG in Transport Data that is in progress - Beth Zeitler (Millennium Challenge Corporation, USA)
> > * Coverage: Standards for Big Earth Data - Peter Baumann (Jacobs University)
> > * Enabling the re-use of spatial information across domains - Andrea Perego (JRC, European Commission)
> > * Copernicus EU Programme - Andrea Perego (JRC, European Commission)
> > * Joint W3C/OGC Spatial Data on the Web WG - Andrea Perego (JRC, European Commission)
> > * Discussions on Geospatial Data Science - Vision 2030 - chaired by Suchith Anand (GODAN/University of Nottingham)
> > * The Rise of OpenStreetMap as a World Mapping Agency [3] - discussions chaired by Suchith Anand (GODAN/University of Nottingham)
> > * NASA Europa Challenge 2017 and OpenCitySmart updates - Suchith Anand (GODAN/University of Nottingham)
> >
> > * Updates on Capacity Development from IGAD meeting - Suchith Anand (GODAN/University of Nottingham)
> >
> > * Ideas/updates on Training programs for Geospatial Data Science - All
> > * Ideas for specific actions /new WGs in Geospatial IG - All
> >
> > There will be gotomeeting facility for those interested to join remotely. I am waiting for the RDA hosts to send me the details of this and it will updated in the main website at
> > https://www.rd-alliance.org/ig-geospatial-rda-9th-plenary-meeting <https://www.rd-alliance.org/ig-geospatial-rda-9th-plenary-meeting>
> >
> > I look forward to welcome you all for productive discussions and actions for building the global research agenda for Geospatial Data Science.
> >
> > Best wishes,
> >
> > Suchith
> >
> >
> >
> > [1] http://www.geoconnexion.com/uploads/publication_pdfs/uk_v15i18-058-059-Op951AF3.pdf <http://www.geoconnexion.com/uploads/publication_pdfs/uk_v15i18-058-059-Op951AF3.pdf>
> >
> > [2] https://www.devex.com/news/how-nasa-and-the-un-are-using-location-intelligence-to-build-smart-cities-in-developing-countries-89721 <https://www.devex.com/news/how-nasa-and-the-un-are-using-location-intelligence-to-build-smart-cities-in-developing-countries-89721>
> > [3] http://opensourcegeospatial.icaci.org/2017/03/the-rise-of-openstreetmap-as-a-world-mapping-agency/ <http://opensourcegeospatial.icaci.org/2017/03/the-rise-of-openstreetmap-as-a-world-mapping-agency/>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee
> > and may contain confidential information. If you have received this
> > message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it.
> >
> > Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this
> > message or in any attachment. Any views or opinions expressed by the
> > author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the
> > University of Nottingham.
> >
> > This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
> > attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your
> > computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email
> > communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as
> > permitted by UK legislation.
> >
> > -------------- next part --------------
> > An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> > URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20170324/bcb9f2fe/attachment-0001.html <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20170324/bcb9f2fe/attachment-0001.html>>
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > Message: 4
> > Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 16:48:20 +0000
> > From: Steven Feldman <***@gmail.com <mailto:***@gmail.com>>
> > To: OSGeo Discussions <***@lists.osgeo.org <mailto:***@lists.osgeo.org>>
> > Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor
> > to market thier properitery product as Open?
> > Message-ID: <DA3DA905-6C65-4D42-A9F9-***@gmail.com <mailto:DA3DA905-6C65-4D42-A9F9-***@gmail.com>>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> >
> > I wanted to respond to Suchith’s query but I found the strength and length of my thoughts to be too much to include in an email. I was also keen to share them with a wider audience than the regulars on this list.
> >
> > So if you are interested in my views on the use of the adjective ‘open’ you can read my post on "Esri isn’t evil” at http://knowwhereconsulting.co.uk/blog/esri-isnt-evil/ <http://knowwhereconsulting.co.uk/blog/esri-isnt-evil/> <http://knowwhereconsulting.co.uk/blog/esri-isnt-evil/ <http://knowwhereconsulting.co.uk/blog/esri-isnt-evil/>>
> >
> > Feel free to rant at me in the comments section of my blog or back her on the list
> >
> > May the FOSS be with you
> > ______
> > Steven
> >
> >
> >> On 23 Mar 2017, at 19:00, board-***@lists.osgeo.org <mailto:board-***@lists.osgeo.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> Send Discuss mailing list submissions to
> >> ***@lists.osgeo.org <mailto:***@lists.osgeo.org>
> >>
> >> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> >> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss <https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>
> >> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> >> discuss-***@lists.osgeo.org <mailto:discuss-***@lists.osgeo.org>
> >>
> >> You can reach the person managing the list at
> >> discuss-***@lists.osgeo.org <mailto:discuss-***@lists.osgeo.org>
> >>
> >> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> >> than "Re: Contents of Discuss digest..."
> >>
> >>
> >> Today's Topics:
> >>
> >> 1. Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
> >> properitery product as Open ? (Suchith Anand)
> >> 2. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
> >> properitery product as Open ? (Jody Garnett)
> >> 3. Re: Is it possible for proprietary GIS vendor to market their
> >> proprietary product as Open ? (Hogan, Patrick (ARC-PX))
> >> 4. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
> >> properitery product as Open ? (Kiringai Kamau)
> >> 5. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
> >> properitery product as Open ? (María Arias de Reyna)
> >> 6. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
> >> properitery product as Open ? (María Arias de Reyna)
> >> 7. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
> >> properitery product as Open ? (María Arias de Reyna)
> >> 8. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
> >> properitery product as Open ? (Luí­s Moreira de Sousa)
> >> 9. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
> >> properitery product as Open ? (María Arias de Reyna)
> >> 10. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
> >> properitery product as Open ? (James Klassen)
> >> 11. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
> >> properitery product as Open ? (Jody Garnett)
> >> 12. Re: GRASS GIS video from 1987: 30th anniversary blog post /
> >> link (Jeff McKenna)
> >>
> >>
> >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >> Message: 1
> >> Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2017 20:15:27 +0000
> >> From: Suchith Anand <***@nottingham.ac.uk <mailto:***@nottingham.ac.uk>>
> >> To: "***@lists.osgeo.org <mailto:***@lists.osgeo.org>" <***@lists.osgeo.org <mailto:***@lists.osgeo.org>>,
> >> "***@lists.osgeo.org <mailto:***@lists.osgeo.org>" <***@lists.osgeo.org <mailto:***@lists.osgeo.org>>
> >> Subject: [OSGeo-Discuss] Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to
> >> market thier properitery product as Open ?
> >> Message-ID:
> >> <***@HE1PR0602MB2793.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com <mailto:***@HE1PR0602MB2793.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com>>
> >>
> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> >>
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >>
> >> I have a query. If a properitery GIS vendor starts marketing thier properitery products as Open platform and software then what rights do the organisations and customers have who are mislead buying the properitery software thinking it is open have ? The definision of Proprietary software [1] is very clearly defined, so how can it be possible for any properitery GIS vendor to market their software knowingly as open platform if it is properitery?
> >>
> >>
> >> This also greatly affects the business and revenues of true open source software companies . Who is responsible for any misleading marketing that results in losses to both customers who are mislead to buy the properitery software thinking it is open and also to other companies who do true open source business who lose out on the business opportunities? Is it right business ethics to do this?
> >>
> >>
> >> Best wishes,
> >>
> >> Suchith
> >>
> >>
> >> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proprietary_software <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proprietary_software>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> > -------------- next part --------------
> > An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> > URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20170324/be45add5/attachment-0001.html <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20170324/be45add5/attachment-0001.html>>
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > Subject: Digest Footer
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Discuss mailing list
> > ***@lists.osgeo.org <mailto:***@lists.osgeo.org>
> > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss <https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > End of Discuss Digest, Vol 123, Issue 22
> > ****************************************
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> ***@lists.osgeo.org <mailto:***@lists.osgeo.org>
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss <https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>
>
> This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee
> and may contain confidential information. If you have received this
> message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it.
>
> Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this
> message or in any attachment. Any views or opinions expressed by the
> author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the
> University of Nottingham.
>
> This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
> attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your
> computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email
> communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as
> permitted by UK legislation.
Suchith Anand
2017-03-28 23:18:14 UTC
Permalink
Hi Steven,

Thank you for your email. This is the kind of insights and information i am looking for, so many thanks for sharing your experience .

First of all, i am also of the view that both open and properitery systems have an important place and need to work together . We are all part of a big ecosystem all working for Geo. I believe in open discussions to help find better understanding. I believe GIS is a fundamental technology for enabling basic infrastructure development in developing countries and i am hoping that governments worldwide strongly invest in this but it is important that there are low cost solutions available with local innovation ecosystems esp. in poor countries (otherwise even if the GI systems are implemented it wont be sustainable in the long term ) hence FOSS is key to make this possible in developing countries context especially. The high cost of GIS software has been a reason that even today many of the cities and towns in developing countries do not have working GIS systems for urban planning etc . I fully agree that there should be choices and strong competition and it is upto the customers to make the decision based on thier requirements on a wide range of criteria and there is no one right choice.


It is very important to note that OSGeo ecosystem is fully linked and part of the wider FOSS ecosystem. In fact, without the FOSS ecosystem , OSGeo (or its individual projects like gvSIG or OSGeo Live will not happen ). When we look at jobs creation we need to reflect this in the studies and calculation. In fact it is the " local FOSS innovation ecosystems" that help projects like ***@Schools or gvSIG Batovi even possible.I am interested to work on research looking into this in the future if i get the opportunity.

For example, I am interested to understand the number of jobs created by ***@School in Kerala but the more i looked into it i realised i will need a detailed study with local distributed field staff for finding any meaningful study and result. I wont be able to do this by a online survey methodology. For the ***@Schools in Kerala,even though technically it is lead by one department, an initiative of this scale is working over a decade because of so many different stakeholders and skill levels from content developers to those involved in train the trainers to software and content upgrades to even locally run hardware clinics! (we dont throw away old/not working computer but repair them ) . The school sizes are also very varied . That is why i use the term "local innovation ecosystems". For running an initiative of this scale of around 12000 schools, 60 lakh students, i would guess atleast 1 FOSS related IT job is needed for every 10 schools (very conservative estimate) so atleast 1200 FOSS jobs are needed for this initiative to be just running . But this is my estimated guess NOT based on any study. I am interested to know how many jobs are created both directly and indirectly from an initiative like this? Indirect skilled jobs are key for the success as this is the local innovation ecosystem that make this initiatives work not just government staff .I dont know the exact numbers for FOSS ecosystem as it is too much complicated to understand without a detailed and indepth study looking at all different aspects and dimentions. Even one small state of Kerala (that i am originally from), i cannot understand this fully. It is very difficult to know this exactly by doing a survey only as it is so widely dispersed and very varied . Even the school sizes and needs are very varied (from those schools with over thousand students to schools with less than 100 in remote areas).

gvSIG is a much larger scale initiative than ***@School (which is only a state level initiative) not only in Spain but even its offshoot education initiatives like gvSIG Batovi is covering spatial education for all schools nationally in Uruguay. Again, I do not know exact numbers needed to sustain an initiative like gvSIG Batovi or its parent body gvSIG but my guess is there has to be thousands of FOSS related IT jobs directly or indirectly that help sustain the gvSIG local innovation ecosystems. There is again strong FOSS ecosystem and local FOSS innovation ecosystems and jobs that make this possible including the wider Ciebal initiative. Hence my guess is that there should be thousands of FOSS jobs direct and indirect that has resulted in gvSIG and gvSIG Batovi ecosystems. So for an national initiative like gvSIG Batovi alone which i understand reaches all schools in the country there has to be hundreds of FOSS related IT jobs in different aspects to make it even possible. There has to a detailed study including field work to understand this. The problem with FOSS or OSGeo impact studies is that it is difficult to find even how many people are using a particular FOSS software (for example QGIS). We may be able to find from server downloads (say 1 million downloads) for QGIS till date but practically in many developing countries (where there is low bandwidth) once QGIS or gvSIG software is downloaded once it keeps replicated hundreds of times through USBs , DVDs. That is why only a minute percentage is being recorded. I dont have the answer for finding the exact solution for finding the exact no of users for QGIS or gvSIG so ideas welcome. This was one of the reason (other being not able to get focussed time and resources needed specifically for detailed study) that i couldnt progress on the paper i was planning on "How to quantify the economic impact of Open Source Geospatial software " two years back .


But it was just by coincidence while i was working on getting data for this research paper on "How to quantify the economic impact of Open Source Geospatial software " that i came across Randal Hale's email's on the difficulties faced by one high school in the USA for Proprietary software updates [1]. It was a clear wake up call on the consequences of Proprietary GIS agenda for schools and education. It was then i decided to send an Open request to AAG [2]and humbly request AAG to specifically include Open Education principles firmly in the new Advanced Placement course in Geographic Information Science and Technology (GIS&T).

On 22nd June 2015 when i read Dave Murray's (GIS Coordinator, City of Westminster, USA ) reply email on this ,i realised that this is a much wider problem and we need to make all colleagues globally aware of the dangers of falling into any vendor's very clever marketing traps for online services . Dave has kindly given me permission to share his email with the wider geo community so the wider community is aware of these kind of clever marketing and vendor lock-in tactics . I sincerely thank Dave for coming forward to share his experience so others do not fall in these very clever strategies of some vendor (either open or properitery).

Dave wrote "We got caught in the proprietary vendor's trap a couple of years ago. Our public works department adopted the vendor's online service. We had a number of business operations running that were critical to our success. Then the vendor told us the service would cost $15,000 + per year to continue. Quite a shock and after we even promoted their service at conferences. After that, I have real questions about what I can believe from them."[1].

I believe 99 percent of the geobusiness and vendors (both open and properitery) are honest and follow good and ethical business practices . But it is a reminder for all of us to realise the costs of being silent for any misleading marketing strategies of any vendors (either open or properitery) as it is affecting not just government organisations such as City of Westminister in USA and other government, business and education organisations worldwide as the cost of moving from vendor lockin will be so high that users will be forced to keep paying whatever higher rates the vendor sets in the future but it also will affect our future generations education and innovation opportunities. If this can happen to a government organisation in an advanced country like USA imagine the situvation for poor countries! Unfortunately many are very scared even to discuss this in public .


I am happy to understand from you that that procurement regulations in UK and EU are strong and have a high degree of transparency and fairness but in many developing and poor countries i am not sure there is still good procurement regulations and practices in place. In some developing countries , it is a sad fact that corruption is a big problem and the biggest sufferers are the poorest people. Corruption cannot be fully solved by technology , or new laws or regulations (as the corrupt and greedy will always find loopholes) but it needs spiritual awakening at all levels and everyone should take a moral pledge to not to do any unethical business practices either directly or indirectly.

For me it is the Open Principles in Education that is important not software X or Y or Z ( open source or properitery) . I have taken clear stand on open source GIS vendors also if i find any thing that undermines Open Principles in Education . For example see my mail query on open source Cesium http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail//geoforall/2016-August/003114.html

I believe in the importance of Open Principles in Education. GeoForAll means Geo for All and we welcome everyone to be part of Openness in Education. The GeoforAll mailing list and discussions are all fully open to all. All major properitery GIS vendor staff are members of GeoForAll lists and i welcome them with friendship and they are all free to contribute ideas and discuss thier ideas/viewpoints. It is also important the voice of voiceless is given chance to be heard.

For me, Openness means being open to different perspectives ,ideas, viewpoints, cultures and learning and improving to be a better human every day...

Best wishes,

Suchith


[1] http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/2015-June/014405.html

[2] http://opensourcegeospatial.icaci.org/2015/06/open-gis-academics-and-educators-please-apply-to-aag-call-before-june-15th-2015/

________________________________________
From: Steven Feldman <***@gmail.com>
Sent: 26 March 2017 6:29 PM
To: Anand Suchith
Cc: ***@lists.osgeo.org
Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] (no subject)

Suchith

You mention "high cost of GIS software procurement for governments”. I am not sure how you are measuring this “high” cost and against what? For most local government bodies (in the developed world) I would expect the cost of GI software to be 0.1% to 0.2% of total budget and less for a central government department. I don’t consider this to be “high” but of course as taxpayers many of us would like expenditure to be lower whether it is on software or people or ...

My experience of procurement is based on the UK but probably applies to much of Europe. All but the smallest procurements are governed by EU regulations and are pretty testing for vendors (regardless of whether they offer proprietary or open source solutions) and have a high degree of transparency and fairness. Typically cost will be one of the two main criteria on which bids are evaluated, the other being quality.

The gvSIG community is impressive, on what do you base "created thousands of jobs”? That is more than I estimated for the whole FOSS4G ecosystem last year.

I agree that in circumstances where an organisation wants to deploy thousands of desktops, an open source GI desktop may well save money compared to the cost of a proprietary licensed product particularly if the organisation can provide training and support from internal resources. This could be the case in the education sector. But, and this is a big but most government departments are moving away from desktop GI to server based solutions and in those circumstances the costs of implementation, integration, support and hosting will substantially exceed any costs of licenses.

I spend much of my working time advocating and marketing open source GI and, in the past, I have also built a very successful business based on proprietary software. The choices that customers make are based on a wide range of criteria, there is no one right choice and it is a misunderstanding of sophisticated buyers to suggest that they have in some way been mislead by vendors whether they are proprietary or open source.

Let’s grow the usage of Open Source GI through positive advocacy of its benefits, investment of time and money in high quality marketing and an understanding of and respect for the strengths of our competitors.

Best
______
Steven


On 26 Mar 2017, at 07:53, Suchith Anand <***@nottingham.ac.uk<mailto:***@nottingham.ac.uk>> wrote:

Hi Steven,

Thank you for your email and information. I am an educator and researcher. I have zero knowledge or expertise in software sales or software procurement .I do not know the answers but i am sure by harnessing the collective wisdom of the community we will be able find the best ideas for bringing down high cost of GIS software procurement for governments for cost savings of tax payer money and create innovation opportunities for all.

There needs to be detailed study on how we can bring down high GIS software costs for govenments worldwide . Governments are are one of the biggest spenders and it is all hardworking taxpayers money from cleaners to teachers, hence it is important to think of cost savings . My gut feeling is if there are open and transparent procurement systems and lot of competition (no vendor monopolies), then GIS software implementation costs will come down and also create lot of innovation and value added opportunities for big companies as well as SMEs. There need to be best practice sharing globally. For example i am interested to understand more about gvSIG ecosystem[1] in Spain and other similar examples . gvSIG didn't create any Billionaires or multi Billionaires (that was not its purpose) but it did create lot of innovation , helped local governments , created thousands of jobs and a vibrant ecosystem and community. More importanly for me, it helped create gvSIG Batovi which went on to provide high quality spatial education opportunities for millions of poor students in Uruguay and other countries.

I know good examples of large scale IT projects done with low cost in my state Kerala in India ( we are a developing country with lot of resource constraints ). For example ***@School project [1] (which is World’s largest simultaneous deployment of FOSS based ICT education). It is running for over a decade now benifitting over 12,000 schools, about 60 lakh students, 6 million students and 200000 teachers.There are costs for implementation, customisation (we have local language- Malayalam), integration, training, ongoing support, maintenance and it is all done locally and innovation ecosystems have been created locally. More importantly we can scale this up easily to millions of schools as needed and there is no fear of vendor lock -in. Thank God that major software vendors or sellers didn't get involved in this!

So as i told my knowledge in this is very limited, so i am depending on experts like you to help guide me.

Best wishes,

Suchith

[1] http://www.gvsig.com/

[2] https://itschool.gov.in/glance.php
________________________________________
From: Discuss <discuss-***@lists.osgeo.org<mailto:discuss-***@lists.osgeo.org>> on behalf of Steven Feldman <***@gmail.com<mailto:***@gmail.com>>
Sent: 25 March 2017 5:06 PM
To: ***@lists.osgeo.org<mailto:***@lists.osgeo.org>
Subject: [OSGeo-Discuss] (no subject)

It is important to note that the cost of licences in a solution (i.e. something more than a simple desktop implementation) are only a part of the overall cost and in many cases, in my experience, a small part.

Implementation, customisation, integration, training, ongoing support, maintenance and hosting are the main costs regardless of whether the underlying software is proprietary or open source

My experience of selling to the public sector is that, on occasions, proprietary solutions have been lower cost than open source.

Steven


> On 24 Mar 2017, at 19:00, discuss-***@lists.osgeo.org<mailto:discuss-***@lists.osgeo.org> wrote:
>
> Send Discuss mailing list submissions to
> ***@lists.osgeo.org<mailto:***@lists.osgeo.org>
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> discuss-***@lists.osgeo.org<mailto:discuss-***@lists.osgeo.org>
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> discuss-***@lists.osgeo.org<mailto:discuss-***@lists.osgeo.org>
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Discuss digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
> properitery product as Open ? (Suchith Anand)
> 2. Re: Wiki: InfrastructurePreferencesStatusQuo - call for
> update (Vicky Vergara)
> 3. Ideas for the building global research agenda for Geospatial
> Data Science (Suchith Anand)
> 4. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
> properitery product as Open? (Steven Feldman)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 21:51:53 +0000
> From: Suchith Anand <***@nottingham.ac.uk<mailto:***@nottingham.ac.uk>>
> To: María Arias de Reyna <delawen+***@gmail.com<mailto:delawen+***@gmail.com>>, Luí­s Moreira
> de Sousa <***@protonmail.ch<mailto:***@protonmail.ch>>
> Cc: "***@lists.osgeo.org<mailto:***@lists.osgeo.org>" <***@lists.osgeo.org<mailto:***@lists.osgeo.org>>
> Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor
> to market thier properitery product as Open ?
> Message-ID:
> <***@HE1PR0602MB2793.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com<mailto:***@HE1PR0602MB2793.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com>>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> +1 .
>
>
> I am also interested in how we can protect taxpayers money in this. The need for cost savings by using Open source GIS software will help the local authorities and various government departments across Europe in reducing huge licence fee costs for proprietary software and Government and taxpayers as a whole will benefit from cost efficiencies, reduce the cost of lock-in to suppliers and products. This is especially important for future IT investments (for example Cloud Computing) , so that more options are explored and choices available. I presented my ideas on the importance of having a National level strategy for Open Principles in Geospatial [1] . Overview slides are at https://www.slideshare.net/SuchithAnand/national-level-strategy-for-open-principles-in-geospatial
>
>
>
> It is my duty as a global citizen to work on this so that all our future generations are empowered fully. Let us plan to meet and discuss ideas at FOSS4G -Europe for making OSGeo European chapter.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Suchith
>
>
>
> [1] http://opensourcegeospatial.icaci.org/2016/03/national-level-strategy-for-open-principles-in-geospatial-ideas-and-inputs-needed/
>
> ________________________________________
> From: Discuss <discuss-***@lists.osgeo.org<mailto:discuss-***@lists.osgeo.org>> on behalf of María Arias de Reyna <delawen+***@gmail.com<mailto:delawen+***@gmail.com>>
> Sent: 23 March 2017 9:20 AM
> To: Luí­s Moreira de Sousa
> Cc: ***@lists.osgeo.org<mailto:***@lists.osgeo.org>
> Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier properitery product as Open ?
>
> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 9:30 AM, Luí­s Moreira de Sousa <***@protonmail.ch<mailto:***@protonmail.ch><mailto:***@protonmail.ch>> wrote:
>
> I believe we need a regulatory framework for "open source" labelling; something like the EU regulation 1169/2011 [2] for organic farming. It not only sets the criteria for farmers to label their products, as it actively prevents others from falsely claiming to that criteria.
>
>
> +1 Restarting the movement for the european chapter to be able to lobby for this...
>
>
>
>
> This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee
> and may contain confidential information. If you have received this
> message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it.
>
> Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this
> message or in any attachment. Any views or opinions expressed by the
> author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the
> University of Nottingham.
>
> This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
> attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your
> computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email
> communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as
> permitted by UK legislation.
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20170323/b5c26dd4/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 19:12:47 -0600
> From: Vicky Vergara <***@georepublic.de<mailto:***@georepublic.de>>
> To: OSGeo Discuss list <***@lists.osgeo.org<mailto:***@lists.osgeo.org>>
> Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Wiki: InfrastructurePreferencesStatusQuo
> - call for update
> Message-ID:
> <CAK_FzuVEcFLgyxKiML8-***@mail.gmail.com<mailto:CAK_FzuVEcFLgyxKiML8-***@mail.gmail.com>>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Added a line for pgRouting
>
> On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 2:14 PM, Cameron Shorter <***@gmail.com<mailto:***@gmail.com>>
> wrote:
>
>> +1 Greatly insightful slide deck from Maxi about Open principles in
>> general and OSGeo in particular. Thanks for sharing.
>>
>> Cameron
>>
>> On 22/3/17 4:02 am, Jody Garnett wrote:
>>
>> That is a *great* talk, and shows a lot of areas where we can improve.
>>
>> There has been a consistent call for "incubation" to continue to hold
>> projects accountable to OSGeo standards. I have resisted these calls as I
>> view incubation as an outreach activity - part of our mission to promote
>> open/transparent software development.
>>
>> Still that is great to have an external review; is that review public?
>>
>> --
>> Jody Garnett
>>
>> On 21 March 2017 at 01:18, Venkatesh Raghavan <
>> ***@media.osaka-cu.ac.jp<mailto:***@media.osaka-cu.ac.jp>> wrote:
>>
>>> Maxi also made an excelling presentation on related topic
>>> at FOSS4G-Asia 2017. The presentation is available at
>>>
>>> http://www.slideshare.net/cannata/massimiliano-cannata-keyno
>>> te-foss4gasia-2017
>>>
>>> Best
>>>
>>> Venka
>>>
>>>> On 2017/03/20 22:08, Jeff McKenna wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Actually Maxi and I did a recent thorough research into OSGeo project
>>>> use of infrastructure, by each project, and it was published as a paper (or
>>>> soon to be). In the short term I know Maxi has submitted it as a talk for
>>>> FOSS4G-Europe. It's good to take a step back and review old processes.
>>>> Actually we hope that that was a start of a regular OSGeo project 'health
>>>> checkup', which obviously is very needed. For example, it was quite
>>>> shocking how many current OSGeo projects are functioning without any
>>>> regular Project Steering Committee meetings, or even a visible Project
>>>> Steering Committee. I am sure Maxi will be sharing those results at
>>>> FOSS4G-E.
>>>>
>>>> -jeff
>>>>
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Discuss mailing list
>>> ***@lists.osgeo.org<mailto:***@lists.osgeo.org>
>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Discuss mailing ***@lists.osgeo.orghttps<mailto:***@lists.osgeo.orghttps>://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss<http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Cameron Shorter
>> M +61 419 142 254
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Discuss mailing list
>> ***@lists.osgeo.org<mailto:***@lists.osgeo.org>
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Georepublic UG (haftungsbeschränkt)
> Salzmannstraße 44,
> 81739 München, Germany
>
> Vicky Vergara
> Operations Research
>
> eMail: ***@georepublic.de<mailto:***@georepublic.de>
> Web: https://georepublic.info<https://georepublic.info/>
>
> Tel: +49 (089) 4161 7698-1
> Fax: +49 (089) 4161 7698-9
>
> Commercial register: Amtsgericht München, HRB 181428
> CEO: Daniel Kastl
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20170323/1a31400c/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 11:05:12 +0000
> From: Suchith Anand <***@nottingham.ac.uk<mailto:***@nottingham.ac.uk>>
> To: "***@lists.osgeo.org<mailto:***@lists.osgeo.org>" <***@lists.osgeo.org<mailto:***@lists.osgeo.org>>,
> "***@lists.osgeo.org<mailto:***@lists.osgeo.org>" <***@lists.osgeo.org<mailto:***@lists.osgeo.org>>
> Subject: [OSGeo-Discuss] Ideas for the building global research agenda
> for Geospatial Data Science
> Message-ID:
> <***@HE1PR0602MB2793.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com<mailto:***@HE1PR0602MB2793.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com>>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Dear colleague,
>
> The Geospatial IG of the Research Data Alliance will be meeting in Barcelona on 5th April 2017 to keep building ideas for the global research agenda for Geospatial Data Science.I am pleased to send the final meeting agenda and invite all interested to join.
>
> The meeting objectives are to :
>
> * Discussions on Geospatial Data Science - Vision 2030 [1]
> * Plan next steps from OpenCitySmart and UrbanGeoBigData [2]
>
> * Ideas for Education programs for Geospatial Data Science
>
> * Discuss Ideas for starting new WGs in Transport Data
>
> Meeting agenda
>
> This meeting aims to build upon our previous meetings and draft agenda below
>
> * Updates on Geospatial IG - Suchith Anand (GODAN/University of Nottingham)
> * Discussions on new WG in Transport Data that is in progress - Beth Zeitler (Millennium Challenge Corporation, USA)
> * Coverage: Standards for Big Earth Data - Peter Baumann (Jacobs University)
> * Enabling the re-use of spatial information across domains - Andrea Perego (JRC, European Commission)
> * Copernicus EU Programme - Andrea Perego (JRC, European Commission)
> * Joint W3C/OGC Spatial Data on the Web WG - Andrea Perego (JRC, European Commission)
> * Discussions on Geospatial Data Science - Vision 2030 - chaired by Suchith Anand (GODAN/University of Nottingham)
> * The Rise of OpenStreetMap as a World Mapping Agency [3] - discussions chaired by Suchith Anand (GODAN/University of Nottingham)
> * NASA Europa Challenge 2017 and OpenCitySmart updates - Suchith Anand (GODAN/University of Nottingham)
>
> * Updates on Capacity Development from IGAD meeting - Suchith Anand (GODAN/University of Nottingham)
>
> * Ideas/updates on Training programs for Geospatial Data Science - All
> * Ideas for specific actions /new WGs in Geospatial IG - All
>
> There will be gotomeeting facility for those interested to join remotely. I am waiting for the RDA hosts to send me the details of this and it will updated in the main website at
> https://www.rd-alliance.org/ig-geospatial-rda-9th-plenary-meeting
>
> I look forward to welcome you all for productive discussions and actions for building the global research agenda for Geospatial Data Science.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Suchith
>
>
>
> [1] http://www.geoconnexion.com/uploads/publication_pdfs/uk_v15i18-058-059-Op951AF3.pdf
>
> [2] https://www.devex.com/news/how-nasa-and-the-un-are-using-location-intelligence-to-build-smart-cities-in-developing-countries-89721
> [3] http://opensourcegeospatial.icaci.org/2017/03/the-rise-of-openstreetmap-as-a-world-mapping-agency/
>
>
>
>
>
> This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee
> and may contain confidential information. If you have received this
> message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it.
>
> Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this
> message or in any attachment. Any views or opinions expressed by the
> author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the
> University of Nottingham.
>
> This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
> attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your
> computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email
> communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as
> permitted by UK legislation.
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20170324/bcb9f2fe/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 16:48:20 +0000
> From: Steven Feldman <***@gmail.com<mailto:***@gmail.com>>
> To: OSGeo Discussions <***@lists.osgeo.org<mailto:***@lists.osgeo.org>>
> Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor
> to market thier properitery product as Open?
> Message-ID: <DA3DA905-6C65-4D42-A9F9-***@gmail.com<mailto:DA3DA905-6C65-4D42-A9F9-***@gmail.com>>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> I wanted to respond to Suchith’s query but I found the strength and length of my thoughts to be too much to include in an email. I was also keen to share them with a wider audience than the regulars on this list.
>
> So if you are interested in my views on the use of the adjective ‘open’ you can read my post on "Esri isn’t evil” at http://knowwhereconsulting.co.uk/blog/esri-isnt-evil/ <http://knowwhereconsulting.co.uk/blog/esri-isnt-evil/>
>
> Feel free to rant at me in the comments section of my blog or back her on the list
>
> May the FOSS be with you
> ______
> Steven
>
>
>> On 23 Mar 2017, at 19:00, board-***@lists.osgeo.org<mailto:board-***@lists.osgeo.org> wrote:
>>
>> Send Discuss mailing list submissions to
>> ***@lists.osgeo.org<mailto:***@lists.osgeo.org>
>>
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>> discuss-***@lists.osgeo.org<mailto:discuss-***@lists.osgeo.org>
>>
>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>> discuss-***@lists.osgeo.org<mailto:discuss-***@lists.osgeo.org>
>>
>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>> than "Re: Contents of Discuss digest..."
>>
>>
>> Today's Topics:
>>
>> 1. Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
>> properitery product as Open ? (Suchith Anand)
>> 2. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
>> properitery product as Open ? (Jody Garnett)
>> 3. Re: Is it possible for proprietary GIS vendor to market their
>> proprietary product as Open ? (Hogan, Patrick (ARC-PX))
>> 4. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
>> properitery product as Open ? (Kiringai Kamau)
>> 5. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
>> properitery product as Open ? (María Arias de Reyna)
>> 6. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
>> properitery product as Open ? (María Arias de Reyna)
>> 7. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
>> properitery product as Open ? (María Arias de Reyna)
>> 8. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
>> properitery product as Open ? (Luí­s Moreira de Sousa)
>> 9. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
>> properitery product as Open ? (María Arias de Reyna)
>> 10. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
>> properitery product as Open ? (James Klassen)
>> 11. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
>> properitery product as Open ? (Jody Garnett)
>> 12. Re: GRASS GIS video from 1987: 30th anniversary blog post /
>> link (Jeff McKenna)
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2017 20:15:27 +0000
>> From: Suchith Anand <***@nottingham.ac.uk<mailto:***@nottingham.ac.uk>>
>> To: "***@lists.osgeo.org<mailto:***@lists.osgeo.org>" <***@lists.osgeo.org<mailto:***@lists.osgeo.org>>,
>> "***@lists.osgeo.org<mailto:***@lists.osgeo.org>" <***@lists.osgeo.org<mailto:***@lists.osgeo.org>>
>> Subject: [OSGeo-Discuss] Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to
>> market thier properitery product as Open ?
>> Message-ID:
>> <***@HE1PR0602MB2793.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com<mailto:***@HE1PR0602MB2793.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com>>
>>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>>
>> I have a query. If a properitery GIS vendor starts marketing thier properitery products as Open platform and software then what rights do the organisations and customers have who are mislead buying the properitery software thinking it is open have ? The definision of Proprietary software [1] is very clearly defined, so how can it be possible for any properitery GIS vendor to market their software knowingly as open platform if it is properitery?
>>
>>
>> This also greatly affects the business and revenues of true open source software companies . Who is responsible for any misleading marketing that results in losses to both customers who are mislead to buy the properitery software thinking it is open and also to other companies who do true open source business who lose out on the business opportunities? Is it right business ethics to do this?
>>
>>
>> Best wishes,
>>
>> Suchith
>>
>>
>> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proprietary_software
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20170324/be45add5/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> ***@lists.osgeo.org<mailto:***@lists.osgeo.org>
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of Discuss Digest, Vol 123, Issue 22
> ****************************************
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
***@lists.osgeo.org<mailto:***@lists.osgeo.org>
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss


This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee
and may contain confidential information. If you have received this
message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it.

Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this
message or in any attachment. Any views or opinions expressed by the
author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the
University of Nottingham.

This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your
computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email
communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as
permitted by UK legislation.






This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee
and may contain confidential information. If you have received this
message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it.

Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this
message or in any attachment. Any views or opinions expressed by the
author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the
University of Nottingham.

This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your
computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email
communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as
permitted by UK legislation.
Kiringai Kamau
2017-03-29 03:50:01 UTC
Permalink
Steven this has been the experience of many corporates as theyrise the ladder of visibility. Indeed from an operations security perspective proprietary solutions end up being cheaper and secure making corporates migrate to proprietary ones.

However, if the desire is to just collect data fir value added analytics it's best to retain the open source dynamic. Proper planning always guides the best model to use.

Kiringai

Sent from my iPhone

> On 25 Mar 2017, at 20:06, Steven Feldman <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Implementation, customisation, integration, training, ongoing support, maintenance and hosting are the main costs regardless of whether the underlying software is proprietary or open source
Arnulf Christl
2017-03-29 09:56:42 UTC
Permalink
Kiringai,
thanks for your thoughts but I cannot quite follow your argument. Or
rather, you are just reiterating an old claim by some proprietary
vendors stating that their software provides more operations security
/due to being developed in a proprietary model/. This claim has never
been evidenced and probably cannot be proven anyway.

Please excuse me if I misunderstood your argument.

Thanks,
Arnulf

Am 29.03.2017 um 05:50 schrieb Kiringai Kamau:
> Steven this has been the experience of many corporates as theyrise the ladder of visibility. Indeed from an operations security perspective proprietary solutions end up being cheaper and secure making corporates migrate to proprietary ones.
>
> However, if the desire is to just collect data fir value added analytics it's best to retain the open source dynamic. Proper planning always guides the best model to use.
>
> Kiringai
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On 25 Mar 2017, at 20:06, Steven Feldman <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Implementation, customisation, integration, training, ongoing support, maintenance and hosting are the main costs regardless of whether the underlying software is proprietary or open source
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> ***@lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss


--
http://metaspatial.net
Spatially enabling your business.
Luí­s Moreira de Sousa
2017-03-29 12:38:59 UTC
Permalink
Dear all,

In my experience maintenance and operational costs are far higher with proprietary software than with open source. With some licenced products operational costs are actually the largest slice of the budget. But well, that is only the experience of a single individual.

However, in these matters we should always apply a macroscopic view. It is far more rational to hire a local company to maintain and develop a particular open source solution, than to send barge-loads of money overseas on licence fees. Open source can be employed as a powerful economic policy tool, directing investment and job creation to where they are most needed.

Cheers.
--
Luís Moreira de Sousa
Im Grund 6
CH-8600 DÃŒbendorf
Switzerland

Phone: +41 (0)79 812 62 65
Email: ***@protonmail.ch
URL: https://sites.google.com/site/luismoreiradesousa
Jonathan Moules
2017-03-29 16:44:47 UTC
Permalink
Following this, I wondered about the actual numbers, and the size of those "barge-loads" of money.
Given we're to a large degree talking around ESRI, the simple option is to look at their most recent UK accounts (I know where to easily find UK ones):
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/01288342/filing-history/MzE1MjUzMTc5MGFkaXF6a2N4/document?format=pdf&amp;download=0 (PDF)

They show £50 million in revenue in 2015, with £22 million of that being "Cost of Sales". If my very basic accounting knowledge is correct (possibly not, but google did help), this is money ESRI have paid to others for goods they've sold, i.e. software licenses given they don't sell physical widgets. It doesn't include their own admin costs.

Some of that £22 million is going to be going to their partners (Oracle are known for their exorbitant licenses after all), but I'd be surprised if less than £15 million of that is going to the ESRI US mothership.

Of that say about half is coming from the public sector, that's about £7 million (which is a conservative guess IMHO - ESRI UK will probably have kept a portion after all too which won't be in the £22 million). It's not a massive number, but it's not chump change either. Steven's 0.01% is still a lot if the absolute numbers are large.
By contract, I can think of a few Open Surce projects that would love to benefit from a portion of £7 million a year spent, and everyone would benefit. (Or it could reduce taxes for everyone in the UK by about 10p a person per year! :-) ).

Cheers,
Jonathan

(Disclaimer - guesswork in the above; don't cite me.)




---- On Wed, 29 Mar 2017 13:38:59 +0100 Luí­s Moreira de Sousa&lt;***@protonmail.ch&gt; wrote ----

Dear all,



In my experience maintenance and operational costs are far higher with proprietary software than with open source. With some licenced products operational costs are actually the largest slice of the budget. But well, that is only the experience of a single individual.



However, in these matters we should always apply a macroscopic view. It is far more rational to hire a local company to maintain and develop a particular open source solution, than to send barge-loads of money overseas on licence fees. Open source can be employed as a powerful economic policy tool, directing investment and job creation to where they are most needed.



Cheers.

--

Luís Moreira de Sousa

Im Grund 6

CH-8600 DÃŒbendorf

Switzerland



Phone: +41 (0)79 812 62 65

Email: ***@protonmail.ch

URL: https://sites.google.com/site/luismoreiradesousa
Loading...