Mr. Upadhyay, I agree with many points you raise, but take exception to following: 1. "Total cost of ownership(TCO) is high in case of open source solution" or "In relation to the total implementation, cost of software is negligible" Proprietary software costs can and are significant in many cases: - Operating System Licenses (per server) - Database Server Licenses (per server) - Application Server Licenses (per server) - Development Tool Licenses (costs passed on to customers from vendors) - Client Connectivity (Per User) - Software Upgrades (per license) - Software AMC (per license) The software costs vary from industry to industry, depending on how competitive the markets are. Let us remember that IT product companies (those that charge software licences) are some of the largest and most profitable companies in the world. Some e.g. Microsoft, Oracle, SAP. Of course open source is not just about costs. The success of open source comes from massive market adoption and consequent feedback and contribution from diverse groups of people. And the adoption is fueled because the software is free, there is simply no barrier to people trying such software. 2. "In India we are fighting for the softwares and codes developed by Western Countries". This does not mean we should stop adopting such software. There is no need for "be Indian, buy Indian" mentality, particularly for open source. We in India are free to join any open source community and contribute and benefit from it. Open Source software has no nationality. 3. "Unless somebody takes responsibility of support or stamps the product, it is not advisable to use the open source softwares . It may be security problem." This is similar to the FUD (fear, uncertainty, doubt) attacks that proprietary software vendors have used in the past to discourage people from using open source. Such assertions have been proved false several times. Let us take a couple of examples, which of these software has security issues: Internet Explorer or Firefox? Microsoft Windows or Linux? Thanks, Savitra Sirohi MD, Nucsoft OSS Labs http://www.osslabs.biz

Message: 5 Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 12:26:43 +0500 From: Upadhyay P K Subject: [LIS-Forum] Regarding SOUL 2.0 V/s Open Source Software To: lis-forum@ncsi.iisc.ernet.in Message-ID: <1587da30462ee398.49be4583@nic.in> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Dear professionals,

My view regarding open source solution vs proprietary are as follows.

1. There are ceratin myths about open source softwares. It is a good topic of discussion and academic study and reserch. But the moment we try to implement, problems arise out. Of course in any new implementation/change, there are problems. People are the most important component in any solution , open source or closed source.

2. Total cost of ownership(TCO) is high in case of open source solution. If you consider the Software installation, server setup, training, AMC, hosting, security, follow-up, customization the cost will be high. In relation to the total implementation, cost of software is negligible. We should not be worry about the open or closed softwares, our motive should be Proper Information Systems Solution. The management and parent organization never stop if a good proposal with time bound implementation is put for financial approval. Government of India has allocated Rs 23000 crore for eGovernance during 11th Plan . Many of the organizations are not able to spend their ICT bugdet or sometime spend anyhow.

3. In India we are fighting for the softwares and codes developed by Western Countries- both Open Source tools, OS, Systems Softwares and majority of the open source softwares( for example Windows, Linux, .NET, JAVA, IIS, Apache, etc). They are developing and launching these projects, and in developping countries including India we are not able to decide which software are to be used. Althogh we should appreciate the efforts of NEWGENLIB team from India and many Open Technology Centres have been started.

4. Only people are talking in fashion of open source, freedom of owning , because it seems free but it's not if you talk of total solution. It has become a fashion to talk of RFID, SmartCard, Web 2.0, Social Networking, MARC, UNICODE, Mobile OPAC, Digital Libraries, etc, even if there is no basic infrastructure like latest hardware, networking infrastructure, web hosting , data entry plan, etc.

5. Earlier also there were almost free software like CDS/ISIS from UNESCO, DELPLUS from DELNET(with only Rs 7500 or so), SOUL for college university from INFLIBNET (with Rs 50000), but libraries did not utilize the opportunity. Majority of libraries does not have capability to understand simple codes of HTML and changing their logo in the software. Actually LIS professionals are not supposed to be programmers. They should be information systems manager.

6. Unless somebody takes responsibility of support or stamps the product, it is not advisable to use the open source softwares . It may be security problem.

7. I have experience of regularly interacting with many big organizations and libraries throughout India that are struggling in selecting the LMS softwares since many years. They have not yet started Data Entry of books. If they could have used even CDS/ISIS or an MS ACCESS database for data entry at least 60% work could have been over in terms of automation.

8 Some libraries I have seen, are not able to publish their OPAC on Internet and maintaning database on local LAN machine. They have used many open source softwares of LMS, Digital Library, Repository learnt in different forums and training programmes. But when question comes of migration, data conversion or enterprise integrating those softwares solutions, they need huge money and running here and there.

9. There are around 5 lakh libraries in the country including schools, hardly 10% of these may be automated using Library Management Softwares. We have to make them automated using open source or closed at the earliest. Here all the stakeholders are required to join and contribute. Only talking of open or closed will not be sufficient.

10. My point in discussing these issues is not to discard the open source softwares, but more of providing the right kind Information Systems solution in totality for Indian libraries. Of course there is open revolution throghout world .

with regards

P K Upadhyay NIC , Delhi

----- Original Message ----- From: Parthasarathi Mukhopadhyay Date: Monday, March 16, 2009 10:18 am Subject: Re: [LIS-Forum] OpenSource Debate To: lis-forum@ncsi.iisc.ernet.in

...

Dear all

A good logical and time befitting debate started at last. I'm completely agreed with Mr. Singh and would like to add a few point in that ....

1. Close source commercial LMSs are non-transparent in the use and application of standards, whereas FLOSS based LMSs are very clear in this direction (take the example of Koha, right from the 1999 it is trying to follow and implement all the global internationally agreed upon standards e.g. EDIFACT, NCIP, Z39.50 etc.); 2. Close source commercial LMSs are still not compliant with Web 2.0 tools, techniques and philosophy. FLOSS based LMSs are quite accommodative in this regard, for example, Koha 3 is RSS compliant (it produce RSS feed for every search query issued by users), supports Tag submission by users to describe a resource, users can post their comments on a particular resource available in the library. In short it follows participative architecture or user-at-the centre stage model. Unfortunately no other LMSs is presently web 2.0-enableb;

3. Koha (2.x and 3.x) is web-centric in architecture;

4. Fully compatible with Unicode 5.1 and thereby ensures storing, processing and retrieval of Indic script based resource (see www.granthalaya.org for a live demo);

5. Koha 3 supports information mashup - in fact we are noe able to snatch cover page images from Amazon without scanning pages or writing a single line of code (see the site of Department of LIS, University of Burdwan @ http://burdwan01.kwc.kohalibrary.com/ - search digital library or LIS related terms).

Hope to see a brave open world

Dr. Parthasarathi Mukhopadhyay Department of Library and Information Science University of Burdwan, Burdwan, Rajbati - 713104, WB ---------------------------------------------------

...

----- Original Message ----- From: "Sukhdev Singh" To: "SatishDpnd@Adroit" Cc: lis-forum@ncsi.iisc.ernet.in Subject: Re: [LIS-Forum] SOUL-NewGenLib-OpenSource Debate Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 11:16:33 +0530

Dear All,

I don't think we should shy away from any debate. But unfortunately LIS Community in India seems to be relatively shy of healthy debates.>

If I am given a chance to implement a Library Automation System, I would prefer a model in the following order:

1. Open Source Solution. For the freedom it provides in terms of 'owning' the systems for long term use. I won't mind taking a paid support service.

2. Free Software. For it won't burden my budgets and won't trouble me with approvals of higher authorities.

3. Commercial Solution. I would be going for it if none is available in Open Source domain. I will keep myself ready for migration to an Open Source Solution.

I still feel that efforts required for training and implementation remains the same for all models of softwares.

I would still like to hear more on KOHA Vs NewGenLib. I am impressed with the Delhi Public Library's ( http://dpl.gov.in/ ) implementation> of KOHA, though I have no idea of inside story about it. I would like to see NewGenLib's implementation available for public view.

Thanks

--Sukhdev Singh.

...

In response to LIS-Forum Digest, Vol 72, Issue 13 : Message 2 and earlier discussions on the topic

Dear LIS professionals

The debate on NewGenLib v/s SOUL is simply not necessary because I feel both are meant for different segments of LIS market. SOUL was developed by INFLIBNET years back under the aegis of UGC to support academic Library community which at that time was unable to invest in

...

initial College edition of SOUL was costing merely Rs.15,000/- (until recently) when proprietary standalone LMS was costing Rs.1 lac. There are more than 1600 SOUL installations in India. Just think of them ! What should they do ? Get free-upgrade of SOUL 2.0 (with moderate costs of installation) or go for NewGenLib/Koha which is free and open source. SOUL 2.0 has added many more facilities to its previous version. It's web-based, many International Standards have been adopted and it is SIP2/NCIP compatible too. Now think of those smaller libraries which have only couple of staff, what should they do ? Use readily available upgraded LMS or switch over to free, open source NewGenLib or Koha - for which neither they have expertise nor time to devote.

All of us those who are adopting Open Source software know very well that it needs substantial staff-time-investment - may it be for data migration, customising each function to suit to one's needs or even fixing small problem of default currency. Open Source LMS is only a

...

whether one can make a racing car out of it or not depends upon availability of the workshop facilities, latest tools and machinery, research staff to support and designing team to take care of its dynamics. Therefore I would not blindly support Open Source just because it is almost free compared to proprietary LMS - but would strongly advocate use of SOUL 2.0 by those who would like to concentrate more on user-services than breaking their heads in customising Open Source LMS.

SOUL 2.0 is a step towards upgrading efficiency of LIS community as a whole at very negligible input costs. Those who feel the SOUL 2.0 rates are high should enquire for rates for proprietary LMS in the market, and also how much would it cost to customise Open Source with facilities which are offered by SOUL 2.0.

I have yet not come across any fully operational Open Source LMS in any of the large Libraries in India. Many open source agencies claim that each and every module/facility can be customised, e.g. Template designs, RSS Feeds, Blogs, Federated Search, scheduled auto e-mail generators, Customised> > Reports, MIS stats, Online Reservation facility, built-in SIP2/NCIP, Video-streaming facility through web-OPAC, importing records from web catalogues, exporting records in variety of formats, remote log-ins, Serials Management etc., but when it comes to practical implementation, it takes months together to mould them to match needs of the organisation.

Therefore I will never ever criticise indigenous LMS like SOUL. It is/was developed for specific cause/purpose and not for competing with proprietary LMS or to discourage use of Open Source LMS. We all should recommend it to all those who are short of resources and do not have time/expertise to customise freely available open-source.

Would certainly welcome your views

Happy LMSing !

satish deshpande formerly Head British Council Library Ahmedabad

Mentor, Nirma University Libraries; Adviser, KM&IC, National Institute of Design, Ahmedabad M : 098250 30460 email : satish.dpnd@gmail.com

In response to LIS-Forum Digest, Vol 72, Issue 13 : Message 2

...

Message: 2 Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2009 13:56:14 +0530 (IST) From: "I.R.N.Goudar" Subject: [LIS-Forum] SOUL-INFLIBNET-NEWGENLIB To: lis-forum@ncsi.iisc.ernet.in Message-ID: Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed

Dear Professionals, Herewith I have forwarded my response I sent through lis- forum soon after the announcement of NewGenLib as open source software. My message answers few questions raised by few LIS colleagues. Ther is no poin in discussing the merits and demerits of SOUL, GRANTHALAYA, Maitreyee, Suchika, etc. At this juncture of avilability of open source software, what should be our (librarians) stand? What responsible institutions like INFLIBNET,> >> NISCAIR, DRTC, NIC, Keshavan Institute, etc should do? Government has spent lot of money various agencies for the development of good library automation system. Some of them were cooked half? Discontinued further developments? some of them never saw the light of the day? Some of them did not get good support after sale or implementation? While I have full confidence in the capability and vision of present

On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 7:51 PM, SatishDpnd@Adroit wrote: proprietary LMS. The powerful engine, but director of

...

...

INFLIBNET for developing SOUL as one of the good system, my basic question is, at this juncture is it necessary still put efforts and spend money on such developments, when so many open source softawre are available? NEWGENLIB, apart from using open source flatform, uses only open standards. It has stood test ofthe time. At national level we should have customization, migration and support service arrangements on any open system we adopt. MY LIS-FORUM MESSGE SENT ON 11 JAN 2008, GIVES SOME SUGGESTIONS IN THIS MATTER (Copy enclosed below) Goudar

------------------------------------------------------------

---

...

...

...

Dr. I.R.N. Goudar Tel: 91-80-25086081 Sci F & Head, Information Centre for 91-80-25235315 Aerospace Science and Technology Fax: 91-80-25268072 National Aerospace Laboratories E-mail:goudar@css.nal.res.in Airport Road, BANGALORE-560 017 India http://www.icast.org.in/staff/goudar.html

-- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.

_______________________________________________ LIS-Forum mailing list LIS-Forum@ncsi.iisc.ernet.in http://ncsi.iisc.ernet.in/mailman/listinfo/lis-forum

-- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. _______________________________________________ LIS-Forum mailing list LIS-Forum@ncsi.iisc.ernet.in http://ncsi.iisc.ernet.in/mailman/listinfo/lis-forum

-- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.

_______________________________________________ LIS-Forum mailing list LIS-Forum@ncsi.iisc.ernet.in http://ncsi.iisc.ernet.in/mailman/listinfo/lis-forum

...

-- _______________________________________________ Search for products and services at: http://search.mail.com

-- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.

_______________________________________________ LIS-Forum mailing list LIS-Forum@ncsi.iisc.ernet.in http://ncsi.iisc.ernet.in/mailman/listinfo/lis-forum

-- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.