Newham Council IT leaders face backlash for choosing Microsoft over open source
- Posted:
- 12:31 01 Sep 2004
- Topics:
- Open Source Software | Thin Clients & Remote Desktops | Software Companies
Microsoft vs open source trials
highlight complexity of cost calculations
Newham Council's decision earlier this month to opt for Microsoft,
rather than open source technology, surprised many IT professionals
and angered open source advocates. It also highlighted the
complexity of deciding between proprietary and open source software
strategies
When the council's head of ICT Richard Steel decided last year to
pit open source software against Microsoft products in a prolonged
trial it was seen as one of the most important tests yet of the
viability of alternatives to proprietary systems.
The council, which had a Microsoft Windows NT4 infrastructure,
commissioned an independent study from consultancy Netproject to
examine the cost of switching to and running an open source
environment.
Netproject suggested an approach based on a mixed Microsoft/open
source environment. It estimated this would cost £443,000 in
licences for Microsoft's thin client Terminal Services on the
desktop, connected to Linux servers where possible.
Microsoft was invited to propose its own solution to meet the
council's infrastructure needs, and it commissioned Capgemini to
report on the options.
Microsoft prepared an estimate for the council based on a TCO model
from Gartner, which was reviewed by Capgemini. This estimated
migration and deployment cost to upgrade to a strategic Microsoft
platform was approximately £1.3m, excluding software licensing
fees.
The ramifications of Newham's decision to sign up to a 10-year
strategic relationship with Microsoft will be felt for many months
to come, but one thing the trial has highlighted, according to Gary
Barnett, research director at Ovum, is the complexity of total cost
of ownership calculations and of fundamentally changing an
enterprise's IT strategy.
"The Newham trail shows that the cost of ownership story is not
clear," said Barnett. "It is not true that Linux will always give
significant total cost of ownership savings. Any organisation
considering a fundamental overhaul of its IT structure should look
at the whole range of options available, including more effective
management of Windows, thin client technologies and open source
solutions."
Newham's choice: three options proposed by Netproject
The Netproject study commissioned by Newham Council proposed three alternative IT strategies:
- Using thin client technology based on Windows Terminal Services to run Windows applications. Netproject estimated that, for 5,400 users, the cost would be £200,000. In addition, the council would have to pay licence fees for desktop application software such as Microsoft Office.
- A hybrid set up. The Netproject study established that a pure open source option would not be practical for the council. However, it recommended using open source desktop applications where possible and Windows Terminal Services to run the remaining Windows applications. The cost over two to three years was put at £443,000. This was Netproject's recommended option.
- A full-scale upgrade to the latest Microsoft software. The Netproject report warned Newham about the security issues relating to the Microsoft environment and the need to replace a large number of desktops. Netproject estimated the cost of Microsoft licensing would be £1.75m a year for 5,400 desktops, Office and client access licences for Microsoft Systems Management Sever and Exchange 2003.
What do you think about Newham Council's decision? E-mail us at computer.weekly@rbi.co.uk
