[kwlug disc.] "people don't respect what they don't pay for"

[Robert P. J. Day]

On Thu, 20 Sep 2007, Oksana Goertzen wrote:

> If this is a good friend then I would look at it as an excellent
> opportunity to illustrate everything you believe is wonderful about
> open source. ...

well, this is not quite the direction i was going.  let me clarify and
perhaps redefine what i was wondering.

> So, in this vein - I would illustrate what I find compelling about open
> source (and your list is probably much more robust than mine):
>
> (1)  You know what's in the code - you can fix or modify it yourself
> or hire someone to do so.

... big snip of many perfectly valid reasons ...

imagine, if you would, that you're chatting with a fairly high-level
manager who controls the IT purse strings, and the subject of open
source comes up, and you off-handedly suggest that OSS is something he
should consider.  and, being a busy man and not prone to wasting time,
he says, "what's the business case?  give me some numbers."

could you do that?  off the top of your head?  i don't think *i*
could.  in fact, i think that most of us who are linux-heads are so
comfortable in our belief of the superiority of OSS that we just take
it for granted that our arguments should sway others.  but i don't
think many of us are actually prepared with persuasive, snappy
arguments if the situation arises.

busy managers generally aren't prepared to invest time listening to
abstract arguments.  a lot of them are simply, "what's my dollar
bottom line?"  and if you don't have a ready answer, the
conversation's pretty much over.

(i'm betting that those people on this list who make a *living*
selling and supporting OSS solutions have those answers ready, but i'm
fairly sure the rest of us don't, as much as we might like to think we
do.)

i'll go further and bet that i (and lots of others) could play devil's
advocate and argue *against* OSS and make your life difficult if you
were trying to sell me:

you:  "well, first, it's free ..."
me:  "nothing free is worth anything.  you get what you pay for."
you:  "if anything goes wrong, you can look at the source."
me:  "hell, i don't even look at *our* company's source, why would i
want to look at someone else's?  and who do i call if something goes
wrong?  where's this "linux" company?"
you:  "well, there's not really a 'company' ..."
me:  "no company!?  who do i complain to, then?"

... and on and on and on.  i'm sure we all have good logical and
philosophical reasons for why OSS is the superior choice; i'm just
saying that a lot of those reasons might not mean anything to someone
who just wants to hear a solid business case, or he's not interested.

> And lastly I would let them play with Linux - loan them a laptop to
> show them how cool, capable, robust, fun and sleek Linux really is!

i'm sure that that argument would have absolutely no value in making a
business case.  why would someone offer to invest any time playing
with something new and unfamiliar when they already have something
they understand?

in any event, i may have wandered a bit far afield here, but here's a
challenge.  let's say you have one chance to make an impression with
an IT manager or someone fairly high up that controls the IT budget.
you have exactly one sentence to get this person's attention regarding
the value of OSS so that he's willing to listen further.

what's that one sentence going to be?

rday
-- 
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day
Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry
Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA

http://crashcourse.ca
========================================================================