The reasons why Newham Borough Council opted for
Microsoft rather than open-source technology have highlighted the
cost and complexities of moving to open-source
software.
Earlier this week the East London council announced it would be
spending approximately £500,000 a year on Microsoft technology in a
10-year agreement with the supplier. The announcement was based
largely on the results of a trial held by the council that compared
the benefits of using Microsoft software and hardware to
open-source systems.
Richard Steel, head of ICT at Newham said, “Our aim is for a
10-year partnership. We want a long-term commitment to work
together.”
The council considered open-source technology, and paid for an
independent study into the cost of switching and running an open
source environment. But the study conducted by professional
services firm Capgemini and paid for by Microsoft, proved to Steel
that switching to open source would yield a smaller saving than
upgrading to a modern Microsoft-based IT infrastructure.
Newham was already using Microsoft technology such as groupware
calendaring functions in Exchange. Steel said the IT at Newham
comprised 5000 desktops running Microsoft software, Exchange e-mail
and about 70 applications along with a number of other databases
closely integrated with Microsoft technology.
“[This] would have made a migration to open source significantly
harder and more expensive," Steel said.
The study from Capgemini reported that the Microsoft option
would save the council £3.2m over five years compared to about
£1.6m moving to open source.
Another factor in the decision to stick with Microsoft software
was the limited experience of Newham IT staff in open-source
technology.
“We have a team of technicians who like to get into things that
are new. We did run open-source pilots as part of the work we did
with [Netproject] and [we found] we were on a very steep learning
curve.”
Steel also had to consider whether open source technology would
fit in with the council’s plans to allow an increased number of
staff working from home.
“Most of our employees not only use Microsoft Office in the
office, they are also likely to be using it as home users,” said
Steel.
Steel added that Microsoft had listened to its concerns.
“We actually had a genuine discussion on our relative needs and
the areas we needed to improve such as financial model and the
development point of view and our approach to more flexible
working.”
There has been criticism that because the Capgemini study at
Newham was funded by Microsoft it could not have been truly
independent. However, Steel said that it had paid for another
report on the same issue from IT consultancy Netproject, a vocal
advocate of open-source technology.
Eddie Bleasdale, an IT consultant and a director at Netproject,
said even with the Microsoft approach, the council would face hefty
migration costs long-term.
“Microsoft has admitted that there will be 10 years of constant
change. All existing applications will have to be rewritten,” he
said.
Click here for more details of Capgemini's study >>