Operating Systems Vendor lock-in - Essay Example

Online Articles http www.infoworld.com/infoworld/article/03/08/29/34FElinux_1.html http www.lasa.org.uk/cgi-bin/publisher/display.cgi?1146-2101-98505+computanewsQuestion 1. Add content and Proof Read, The major determining factors in the viability of such a vast change are compatibility and cost. A major upgrade such as this affects all software packages currently in use. Therefore, software compatibility among operating systems is crucial. Linux may not even have software available for our particular needs.

For instance, a Linux office version like Open Office may be adequate for word processing, but not for use with another package like adobe or other third party application. We may be out of luck. Equivalent open source software is usually available, it just is not as easy as Microsoft right now. By using Microsoft you have standard platform for all users in your office and worldwide. This is the opposite of Linux, which has multiple distributors delivering similar, but not the same products.

This is where many concerns originate. Just because something is cheaper doesn’t always mean it has the competitive advantage. Software price is just one factor, as other factors prove to be more significant. Primarily compatability, standardization, ease of use and reliability. Because of these aspects, Microsoft still has the advantage. What the future hold is uncertain, in terms of newapplications and products from other vendors, which will be compatible with our currentMicrosoft applications.

Much of the decision on vendors is based on the needs of our organization. We useAdobe and other third party applications frequently, so we cannot do without them. If another vendor were to have available, compatible applications or solutions, this mightget our attention. Even if the solutions are presented as compatible, we would need to have a ‘trial period,’ so that we could fully evaluate the application’s ability to meet our needs. We would require adequate technical support, to help us troubleshoot and answerany new questions that would arise.

Still, a trial period might not give us an adequate picture of how the application or solution would function over a longer period of time.The best solution might be a long term trial period, for one or two machines, assignedto the employees who are able to adapt to such changes more quickly. In other words,those with more technical savvy would be chosen for the trial. Beyond compatibility, functionality and utility are important. The new application must function in the same manner as our current Microsoft products.

Functionality canbe described as how well the application works and how well it meets our needs. Ifthere is one task that we might be prevented from completing, in adopting a new application or solution, we would lose functionality and create more challenge in ourworkplace. Utility, or the ability to change or alter its function over time, is also important. Some applications are used for one purpose, then another is identified. This would also be a requirement of a new solution. In order for the costs associated with installation and implementation to be worthwhile, the application should provide multiple uses and those that we may deem useful in the future of our organization.

Costs are also important in changing software applications or solutions. A new vendor would need to offer the same features, functionality, utility and compatibility forus to even consider a new product. All else being equal, costs would need to be similar.As our organization receives discounts, we would expect a new vendor to match this benefit in pricing. That may be difficult, as our current package is part of an agreementthat was made in the initial decision process. The new vendor could buy out our current agreement, if extremely interested in our business.

Costs also include implementation. A new vendor would need to offer this, as wellas troubleshooting for any issues that occur during the changeover process. Some vendors possess more knowledge in this than others. For this issue, we would likely contact current and previous clients to identify any possible areas of concern. We wouldread technical reports and white papers as well. They usually contain all the specifications for running particular software applications or solutions. This would bean essential part of our decision making process as well.

Associated with costs are guarantees or warranties on vendor products. Any new application from another vendorwould require at least the same support and guarantees. Finally, accessibility and customer service should be provided at a similar level as ourCurrent software support. A situation may arise in which we would need additional features or packages rather quickly. Installation and implementation takes time. Therefore, we would expect a new vendor to meet our requests in a timely manner.

Otheremergency problems may involve systems or networks. If, for some reason, we would need to reinstall or reload applications, immediate service might be required. All the factors mentioned above would need to be considered in choosing a new software application and vendor. Viability and cost are the two most important aspects.Without viability and reasonable cost, the other features do not matter. If the new application is not compatible with current systems and applications, there is no sense inconsidering the other aspects.

The same applies to costs. If they are not comparable,given the comfort level with our current software vendor, there would be no further consideration in making a change.Question 2. Proof Read Only. In regards to my organization, we are most comfortably locked into software packages and our dependency on Microsoft Windows is the most obvious. We are solely a Microsoft Shop, except for a few rogue machines in our organization. The cost of switching operating systems for our organization would be major.

Primarily, environmental changes would lead to need for retraining in multiple areas. Foremost,our technicians would need training on new systems, in order to run them officiallyand securely. Regular users would be forced to learn the new operating system including the changes made to software packages running on the new operating system. Valuable time will be spent on training. This would result in a decreased productivity, due to theconsiderable learning curve for many users As for hardware costs, in our organization this would not be severe .

The hardware infrastructure is compatible with most operating systems. Costs would be determined primarily on man hours spent, setting up and configuring systems to efficient levels. The software costs would be extensive. Many of the software packages in use are only compatible with Microsoft. However, many useful open source software packages can be found for free, that are compatible with Linux and Unix, possibly offsetting total cost operating systems switch. In our case, this is where Microsoft strategically uses differential pricing to keep our business.

As an educational institution, we receive substantial discounts for all Microsoft products. This beneficial situation is an important factor in our decision to stay with Microsoft and compatible software packages. Most of our current software products have been purchased at a fraction of the cost of what the private sector must pay. This makes it easy for us to continue our allegiance to Microsoft. Otherwise, we may have seriously considered a change to Linux a long time ago. Having a tight budget would have forced our hand.

For a rival operating system to get our organization to switch would be a difficult. There are too many obstacles, mainly because the cost savings benefit is not there, for educational institutions. Cost cutting is reason to consider change, however it does not make sense for us.