3. Open Picus

4. Pierpaolo Giacomin,

5. IOT-A

6. Harry Halpin,

7. W3C

8. Pier Luigi Capucci,

9. Noema

10. Denis Jaromil Roio,

11. Dyndy.net

15. ICT accounted for approx €600Billion

16. Software and Services approx €400Billion

17. Approx 18% can be monitored via OJEU procedure

18. Actual OSS value ?????

19. 13% still illegally include trade marks/product names

20. Use of 'negotiated procedures' on increase

22. This is not due to lack of Political will

23. And it is European wide

24. Albeit with notable exceptions

25. BUT WHY?

27. Legacy Contracts

28. Financial Targets

29. Perceived Risks and Myths

30. Network Effects

31. Inertia

32. Audit

33. plus

34. The SME Effect

35. Skills?

36. Understanding of TCO

38. Nothing revolutionary in results but drove some interesting conclusions

39. Research to be published shortly

40. So this is only an appetiser!

41. 'Total Cost of Ownership'

42. Interviews were with existing users of OSS

43. Only 23% can used a formal TCO assessment

44. So results had to identify where benefits made

45. Organisations Indicated that.....

46. Building our Cost Categories

47. Ease of Estimation?

48. Software Life Cycle Software Specific: Search Cost of up-front evaluation study Cost of up-front proof of concept implementation Acquisition Cost of Software Cost of Customisation for business needs Cost of Integration (to current platform) Integration Cost of Migration (data and users) Cost of Training Cost of Process and Best Practice change Use Cost of Support services - in house Cost of Support services - contracted Cost of Maintenance and Upgrades Software scaling (for change in user or transaction volumes) Retire Exit costs (in relation to hardware and software) Exit costs (in relation to changeover, re-training)

50. Useful negotiation tool in making deals with proprietary vendors

51. Builds a stronger, and more expert local IT/IS industry by encouraging regional developers, SMEs

52. Migration costs between OSS products is lower as OSS is often based on open standards

54. Reliability, transparency and greater security of code – many countries are using OSS to create, and hold details of their national ID cards

55. Building of in-house expertise and skills – making you less reliant on external support

56. Allows pooling of resources, expertise and code for reuse, customization, and change

57. Organizational Benefits Organization Specific: Strategic lever Open source software has been used as a cheaper option to help stimulate competition. Dependence Open source helps prevent against upgrade lock-in by a particular vendor. Empowerment Open source software encourages empowerment and the ability to change software as needed through access to the source code and reliance on open standards. Innovation driver Open source can inspire and drive innovation because it is accessible to view and change – but at the same time, it creates an atmosphere conducive to making mistakes and learning from them.

58. Benefits through Creation of an Ecosystem Software Eco-System Specific: Platform co-creation Open source software can be pooled, shared and built upon to create a platform which encourages reuse and co-creation. Collaborative competition The adoption of open source software helps to nurture the local IT industry by levelling the playing field, and encourage collaborative competition. Building in-house expertise Open source software can help to empower the organisation and help develop in-house expertise through access to a knowledgeable community, source code, and an environment which implies sharing and reciprocity. Principle of mutuality The use, adoption and development of open source software can create experts which can then be used as a shared resource across local authorities and central government.

59. What is holding your organisation back from using open source? OS related issues Understanding Licences and license compliance Availability of specific apps Some OSS is very immature, inferior user interfaces Sometimes proprietary alternatives are simply better Feature completeness [Lack of a] community backing the open source project Product related issues Poor coverage in ERP arena ; Lack of availability of open source software for our industry Incomplete implementations; Not working correctly Very complex code bases (and communities)

60. What is holding your organisation back from using open source? Organisation related issues Unclear Procurement policy Value for money Misinformation among upper level management; Lack of knowledge of key technical decision makers; Time availability Support issues Lack of in-house support; lack of in-house knowledge; Understanding by staff; Poor support of open standards by our business partners; Support worries; Requirements for external support contracts Environment issues Desire to have specific software; SAP Legacy Compatibility with Microsoft proprietary file formats Perceived Lack of acceptance of OSS for Public sector solutions Proprietary standards used by environment (govt & clients)

62. Open source is not just or only or always about ‘cheap’. But it can bring a number of distinct and enduring benefits when contrasted to strategies based around proprietary software

63. Migrating to open source is more likely to be successful if it is done when there is a real and present need for change, rather than simply on the basis of finding open source attractive on infrastructure cost arguments

64. Adoption and development of open source can support the sharing of both expertise and expense between government bodies, for example among local authorities forming a flexible route to collaboration

66. Political 'need' and ownership is a must

67. TCO is fundamental but we have to be prepared to explain and justify the wider benefits

68. Procurement policy and practice will be the single largest challenge

69. Just because it is OS doesn't automatically make it better than alternatives – we have to be as professional, as complete as competitors

70. Relationships will be important, confidence building will be essential

73. ABC

74. Rudolf van der Berg,

75. OECD

76. Francesca Bria,

77. Imperial

78. Pierre Pronchery,

79. Bearstech/CKAB

80. Jan Wildeboer,

81. EMEA Open Source Affairs, Red Hat

88. How can we use FLOSS for our countries´development?

89. What can we do to intensify efforts in internationalizing the best practices and initiatives from India, Brazil and South Africa?

92. - All new software developed for or by the South African Government using a FOSS license where possible

98. Championing within departments not forthcoming / duplication of efforts

106. More then 100.000 users

110. Promotes income increase

116. Seven countries agreed to adequate their model to the Brazilian one regarding the procedures for licensing the public software solutions

117. In 2011

125. Over 200 elections successfully completed so far, with over 500,000 individual voters and over 200,000 registered votes;

126. Packaging and conversion to Free Software started in 2009;

127. Intellectual property officially registered in 2011; Submitted to the Public Software Portal of Brazil in 2011, to be released to other Brazilian institutions.

129. One of the answers can be rewarding creativity that is vital to promote innovation;

130. In our contemporary economy, we need systems of intellectual property that values innovation and stimulates openness ;

133. The ones who offer the solutions must belong to the Portal;

134. The more we know about the needs of those who want to use PS the better ( who demands it);

137. This justifies cooperation initiatives in the sense of sharing knowledge, technology and publicizing public software;

138. Future Perspectives: Becoming a State Public Policy, not only a Government Initiative