The Packet Scoop

We are strong advocates of the open source movement in network management. It’s here to stay, and it’s important that commercial solutions are compatible with open source implementations. We’re struggling with the ‘perception’ difference, however, between open source and freeware. Proprietary freeware / shareware network management software has been available for ages. Most of our peers in IT state that the number one reason they use open source is that it’s free. That is, the perception is that the core value proposition of open source is it’s free. But it still must be installed and configured (and that always takes time and work and sometimes several people), then it must be customized, right? Well, no. A recent survey suggests that most open source implementations are not customized at all (save a logo or two). That is, most IT departments who claim to be using open source network management software are really saying that they just implemented free software. It just happens that open source is free to download, and it’s many times more robust than shareware downloaded from a couple of hacks who threw something on the web (that’s not an attack on shareware by the way, as there’s lots of great shareware and shareware developers out there).

Freeware is typically easy to install and simple to use. Open source is not. 

Therefore, even if a check doesn’t go out the door for the software, chances are that the sunk labor cost of implementing and maintaining open source solutions is high. The foundation argument against implementing an open source solution is generally tied to one key concern: uncertainty. Acquiring training, support, and documentation is clearly a challenge, especially when counting on a community of developers instead of dedicated support personnel. Open source isn’t free.

But don’t throw away your open source implementation; just beware of the labor costs associated with supporting it.