This ‘debate’ has certainly gone on for quite awhile. Started off as some guy saying that he can’t read Micro$oft documents on his Linux PC or something like that. It has since go on and on with apparently no end in sight at this point of time. Here’s an example of the letters:
|
Let IDA make its study to select the most effective software for the civil service I refer to the reply by Mr Wong Onn Chee of OpenOffice.org (Format impractical? Largest ministry uses it’; ST, May 1). I was surprised by the remarks made by Mr Wong. Despite his professional status he openly criticised his direct competitor Microsoft and also the Infocomm Development Authority’s software application selection process. He also used Mindef as an example to force the IDA to go his way ie, OpenOffice. Each of us is a champion of certain causes and products (though most of the time it is commercially driven) and we can strongly advocate them with passion. But the IDA should be allowed to carry out its due diligence in selecting the most appropriate and effective software for the civil service. I believe the IDA will make its selection by inviting the software vendors to pitch for the project. Mr Wong can use this channel to provide the IDA with all the facts, the competitive advantages, value-added services and Total Cost of Ownership of OpenOffice. The IDA will also consult all the ministries and gather feedback from various channels for the market’s best practices before drawing a conclusion. If after the presentation and OpenOffice does not get the project, just walk away professionally and accept the decision because in a commercial deal, you win some and you lose some. We should trust the IDA to make an informed decision in its selection of software. Alex Ho Chin Lam |
Personally speaking, the reason why MINDEF uses Open Office, probably has got the least to do with TCO – Total Cost of Ownership – but more to do with security. For e.g. There have been articles circulated on the Internet regarding certain features in Micro$oft WORD, which can compromise security.
I am amazed how some idiots would go on and on with this matter because if you check up on Open Format on Wikipedia, they would have realised that PDF (i.e. the Adobe Acrobat Reader format) is also one of the Open Formats, and the Acrobat Reader is free, just like many software allowing the reading of PDF files. Furthermore, there are free software for converting documents into PDF, if one does not want to buy the Adobe Acrobat Distiller software.
In other words, all these ‘debates’ about the use of Open Source is missing the point because all the gover-min needs to do – to ensure that the original person who complained about not being able to read the documents available – is to provide them in PDF format.
I am trying to imagine how all these un-necessary debate will go on to solve the actual problem. * sigh *