University Business - December 2012 - (Page 40)

MYTH BUSTERS Because of his use of contractors on open source projects, Fenlason has shifted how he hires for the institute. Instead of bringing on highly technical staff members, he focuses instead on hiring those with deep project management experience. Another advantage to the wide array of open source specialists: Fenlason can easily see the code they’ve written or the projects they’ve completed in the past. He regularly evaluates contractors by talking to their other clients, as well. “You get a broad and deep set of information about the person you’re hiring for a project. You know their level of success and experience because everything is in the open,” he notes. should try out open source on a small pilot project, to get a sense of what type of support they need, and what might work in the future, Lewis adds. and applied correctly, open source becomes more secure.” OPEN SOURCE The Myth: Open source is highly insecure, and also bulletproof. The Reality: Much like the cost issue, security is another area where people tend to believe very different myths, Lewis notes. Some think that open source is insecure because hackers can get a code’s blueprint and use it against whoever utilized a certain platform for development. Others think The Myth: Open source is ideal for every institutional project. The Reality: If an open source platform gives a university or college the chance to tweak code, gather skilled consultants, and avoid licensing fees, then it makes sense to use open source for every technology project on campus, right? Well, not so fast. “We use open source where it makes sense,” says Jim Bottum, CIO at Clemson University (S.C.). “If there’s a commercial The Myth: Open source costs nothing, but it’s also expensive. The Reality: “Everybody wants to be hyperbolic on this one,” says John Lewis, chief software architect at Unicon, an IT consulting services provider that specializes in open source for the education market. “They either say open source is free and so it saves you so much money, or they say open source experts end up costing you more and there are tons of hidden costs. Neither is true.” Lewis notes that open source is “free,” but clarifies that the term is similar to free speech, not to free lunch. Although many open source platforms and tools are available without cost, when people talk about open source being “free,” they mean unrestricted and without constraint. Users can make changes to the code and have complete control over what they’ve developed. To use another analogy, Lewis says open source projects are akin to getting a free puppy. The dog may not have a price tag initially, but someone would have to pay for its care and feeding. “What you have to look at is total cost of ownership. You benefit from the fact that there are no licensing fees, but you also need to examine the costs of consuming services,” he says. College and university administrators 40 | December 2012 Compare open source as “free” to free speech, not free lunch. Although many open source platforms and tools are available without cost, when people talk about open source being free, they mean unrestricted and without constraint. that because so many strong developers are going through the code, then it’s some of the most secure code available. “In fact, both and neither is true,” he says. “You can’t make a blanket statement about ‘open source’ in this way. You have to look at projects and do your due diligence. If there are great developers working on it and securing it, then you’re going to have a higher level of security.” Andrew Yu, CEO of Modo Labs, believes that open source has an edge when it comes to security because the level of transparency allows for more thorough software testing. That’s also what’s reduced the amount of bugs and flaws in open source platforms and applications over the past couple years. “The open source community makes a huge effort to address bugs and security concerns,” he says. “If done correctly application that does what we need, then we don’t try to build our own instead. There are definitely areas of operation where the commercial sector has the advantage.” Bottum notes that at Clemson, departments that rely on commercial applications are payroll and human resources. But systems that have a number of applications rolled together—such as student services— can benefit from open source because they can be optimized for the university’s particular needs. “The attraction of open source is its flexibility, and we use it to create a system that better meets our needs,” he says. “But for universities that have to deal with legacy systems, or that have commercial applications already in place, I can see where they might gravitate away from open source.” Cole Clark, global vice president of universitybusiness.com http://www.universitybusiness.com

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of University Business - December 2012

University Business - December 2012
Contents
Editor’s Note
College Index
Ad Index
Behind the News
Money Matters
Independent Outlook
5 Reasons Flipped Classrooms Work
Test Driving Mobile
Open Source Myth Busters
Models of Efficiency
1st Annual Readers’ Choice Awards
Education Innovators
Viewpoint
Endowments: New Questions
End Note

University Business - December 2012