Bringing OSS Into a Closed Source Organization? 427
Piranhaa writes "At the major corporation I work for, there is currently a single person who decides what software to approve and disapprove within the organization. I've noticed that requests from users for open source Windows programs get denied, nearly instantaneously, on a regular basis. Anything from Gimp, to Firefox, even to Vim don't make the cut due to the simple fact that they are open source. Closed source programs from unknown vendors have a much better chance at approval than Firefox does. The whole mentality here is that anybody can change the source of a project, submit it, and you never know what kind of compiled binary you're going to get. I'm a firm believer in open source code, but I also know closed source has its place. So what would be the best way for me to argue, with all the facts, to allow these people to come to their own conclusion that open source is actually good? Would presenting examples of other big companies moving to open source work, and if so what are some good examples? Or can you suggest any other good approaches?"
Get the roadblock out of the way (Score:4, Funny)
They probably already use OSS anyway (Score:5, Funny)
In the end, the best way to make these non-technical PHBs see sense was to simply point out all the OSS they were already using, without even knowing it.
Those HPUX servers? Running Samba shares.
That F5 SSLVPN network appliance? FreeBSD!
The most priceless moment was when I discovered the main OSS opponent was an avid Firefox user. He referred to it as "Microsoft Firefox".
oh hai (Score:2, Funny)
At the major corporation I work for, there is currently a single person who decides what software to approve and disapprove within the organization.
Give Mr. Jobs my regards.
I don't get this (Score:2, Funny)
Sorry, I'm an outsider to the US, and I keep hearing this thing about the right to bear arms.
Isn't this the reason you own guns: to defend yourselves from utter tossers in the workplace? What's the point in all this gun ownership, if you can't kill middle-managers?
Re:I don't get this (Score:5, Funny)
The reason you don't get it is because you don't fully understand. "The right to bear arms" doesn't mean you have the right to hold a gun. It means you have the rights to wield arms of a bear. Unfortunately, they're a little cumbersome, so no one really uses them.
Re:Open Source means there's LESS chance of malwar (Score:2, Funny)
Where were you when she was marrying your brother?! Always make sure to get their views on open source before, it saves any nasty surprises later on.
Re:Don't bother (Score:4, Funny)
That would be my plan as well. But before I did that, I would make him some "brownies" and not tell him what was in it and only a vague idea of who it's from... (muhahahaha!)
If he eats, you might later tell him what might have been in it and who might have made it.
Re:Don't bother (Score:4, Funny)
At the major corporation I work for...
I agree - I think the fact the poster is working for Microsoft is at the root of the problem.
Re:great advice! (Score:3, Funny)
most socially/emotionally healthy individuals have a powerful tool at there disposable called "interpersonal communication." by honing your communication skills, you can exchange thoughts and opinions with other people,
Wait, let me write this down.
Theorically could this "interpersonal communication" be used to communicate with the opposite sex?
Comment removed (Score:3, Funny)
Re:great advice! (Score:4, Funny)
Then, send a request for some of these applications. The high prices and abusive licencing terms you added to the packages will lull them into a false sense of security, and you'll be all set!
Please note, I do not actually recommend this.