|
|
|
| Authored by: IANALitj on Friday, May 11 2012 @ 05:54 AM EDT |
It seems to me that the rules for software acquisition tilt the playing field
sharply in the direction of free ("as in beer") software as well as
free ("as in freedom") software.
Subsection (b) requires consideration of the value received for the money spent.
If no money is spent to acquire free as in beer software, that software is
obviously being favored.
Subsection (c) requires that the cost analysis be documented.
Of course, the proof of the pudding is in the eating. Nobody now knows how well
these requirements will be enforced.
I do anticipate that software consultants looking for business from the state
will be drafting analyses showing that hiring them will save money, overall. A
crude way of looking at this is that a consulting firm pitching a proprietary
product will have to reduce its fees for its consulting services to absorb the
cost of the software.
======
21-R:11 Use of Open Source Software by State Agencies.
I. For all software acquisitions, each state agency, in consultation with the
department of information technology, shall:
(a) Consider whether proprietary or open source software offers the most cost
effective software solution for the agency, based on consideration of all
associated acquisition, support, maintenance, and training costs;
(b) Except as provided in subparagraphs (d) and (e), acquire software products
primarily on a value-for-money basis, based on consideration of the cost factors
as described in subparagraph (a);
(c) Provide a brief analysis of the purchase decision, including consideration
of the cost factors in subparagraph (a), to the chief information officer;
(d) Avoid the acquisition of products that do not comply with open standards for
interoperability or data storage; and
(e) Avoid the acquisition of products that are known to make unauthorized
transfers of information to, or permit unauthorized control of or modification
of a state agency’s computer.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
