Software

Ask something
Discussion Locked

Some policy information required

0 helpful
18 replies

by basheerpt

Closed to new repliesThis discussion is closed. It stays readable, but it takes no new replies.

Hi,
As per our company policy, there are a couple of software which are essential for the business and daily computing. Other than any software are banned, users cannot install any software other than what we give according to our policy.

But, recently we get a single request from a user to give them access of some free software which will help his daily work very much. This software is against the policy and i dont like such free softwares to install users computers, which will increase the requests and am afraid it will be a support headache and un manageable.

I would like to know, how do you IT managers handle this issue?

Expecting some valuable advises.

18 replies

by 93961

I would not allow installation of such software at all against company policy.

by charliespencer

What does the software do? Does the company already have an approved application that does the same thing?

Is the 'free' software actually free for business use? Many popular programs are free for use on privately owned personal computers or educational systems, but require payment for use on workplace computers. Read the license.

Does the application install other unwanted software?

If there isn't an already approved application that does what this one does, if it's legal to install it for free or if it can be purchased affordably, if it's safe, I would consider the request.

Based on the way you interpret the policy, you'd never be able to introduce any new software. Policies are guidelines; they should be reviewed regularly and modified as needed to fit new situations. Otherwise, you'd still be running Lotus 1-2-3 and dBase III.

by basheer

Thanks for the response. I would consider if the freeware has a commercial edition that officially supported. In other words, if users are requesting everyday to have their favorite program, IT department will be dedicated to trace the problems created by such gadgets. Also, if a user has got permission to have his requested freeware, many other users from other departments also come up with their own 'useful' programs. This is not practical and not safe in a corporate environment, especially if there is a software policy exists.

Well, I agree the reviewal of the policy, it should be. I want to know what should be the approach against the freeware program in the policy?

Thanks again.

by charliespencer

Why would you consider freeware any differently from purchased software? The object is to use the best application for the job.

People have favorite commercial applications they want to use. Do you consider those by a different method than freeware? Why?

by nicknielsen

Of course he doesn't want you to use freeware, he wants to sell you his software and services.

In your case answer these questions:

1. What does the freeware do? Look for a two-word answer: file management, development environment, etc.

2. Do you already have paid software that performs that function?

If the answer to question 2 is yes, there's no reason to install the freeware.
If the answer to question 2 is no, you need to decide whether you want that function on your PCs.

Added: Nothing lasts forever. You should always be evaluating new software, free or paid, to replace older software when the time comes. Of course, you may not have the money or people.

by charliespencer

"Freeware tends to have an insidious way of slowly sapping productivity. ... freeware - which is typically far less functional than commercial software ..."

Unsupported opinion.

"Using freeware is like walking around with no health insurance."

So buy a support contract. Many companies make their living supporting freeware applications.

"In some cases, freeware is simply lower-quality software."

This is no different from the first quoted 'point'; it's just an unsupported opinion. In some cases, proprietary software is simply lower quality too. For example Windows Me was an 'upgrade' to Windows 98 that increased the installation size with no additional functionality.

"YOU GET WHAT YOU PAY FOR IN FREEWARE"

That's another opinion, one that doesn't explain why Firefox has carved out 30% of the browser market in less then 5 years. It also doesn't explain the popularity of the LAMP suite (Linux, Apache, MySQL, and Perl / Python) as a popular configuration for servers, or Linux as a preferred OS for embedded systems.

"ABOUT THE AUTHOR John Weathington is President and CEO of Excellent Management Systems, Inc., a management consultancy ..."

In short, like Nick said, the document you're referring to was written by a guy who's trying to sell his services, a guy who's income is threatened when you choose a freeware alternative to what he's selling. That's what ALL 'White Papers' are about - selling you something. Don't base your decision on one guy's advertisement.

I'm not going to tell you every freeware app is as good as a commercial app. However, I'm certainly not going to tell you every commercial app is better than any freeware app just because it's commercial. I suggest you try the software your employee wants to use. (Exactly what application does he want to install?) Does the company already have an approved app that does what the freeware does? If not, evaluate it along with commercial alternatives and pick the best one based on features, available support, security, and ease of use. Don't disqualify something just because you don't have to pay for it.

by johnweathington

Everything in this white paper is my opinion--my expert opinion after being in the industry over 20 years. I don't need to support it or explain it, because it's my opinion. Just like everything in your post, is merely your opinion--but that doesn't mean I'm going to make public judgments about you.

Where you cross the line, is making inferences about me, when you don't know who I am or what my company does. This isn't an "advertisement" as you put it--it's a white paper, stating my opinion. And, my income isn't threatened by what kind of software you or anybody buys.

Read the paper if you want, you can choose to agree with me, or disagree, but don't go around talking about me when you don't know me.

by johnweathington

Hi Basheer,

I appreciate you referencing my article on the hidden costs of freeware.

In response to Nick, I don't sell software, and the services I provide don't apply to this audience or the target of the article that I wrote.

To Palmetto, I'm quite happy with the thickness of my skin, however I don't like it when people assume things about me that aren't true. What I wrote in the article that's being referenced is my expert opinion based on my experience with software development over the better part of the last 20 years.

As I stated to Palmetto, I really don't mind having an intelligent argument over whether or not using freeware is a good idea, but it's quite irresponsible to make any claims about why I wrote the article, as you don't know me at all.

In short, just because you feel a piece of software has a set of functionality that you need, doesn't mean it's a good idea for your company to invest in embracing that software. If you're a developer, your company probably spends a good deal of money on you every day in the hopes that you're as productive as possible. And yes, I'm making a general statement that freeware software has a tendency to make developers less productive than commercial software. Of course there's exceptions to the rule, but count the number of freeware applications that you use on a regular basis, and compare that to the number of commercial applications you use on a regular basis. Personally, I use more commercial software than freeware software. That's not because of the lack of availability for freeware, it's because building quality software has an economic implication on providers of commercial software, and in general I get more value and productivity from commercial software. You have to understand, that's an attitude, because I'm a professional and tools are important to me. I also feel it makes total sense to fly first class to Europe, but some people swear by being cramped in an economy seat for 13 hours because it's a few hundred dollars cheaper. Whatever, everybody has their opinion.

Of course you can point to examples like Apache, Linux, Java, MySQL, and all the other iconic apps that freeware zealots point to when they're trying to make their argument. They'll also reference the devil incarnate of software, Microsoft, the likes of which have ruined the integrity of our software system with their empty promises and beta software that they market as the panacea for all your problems.

That's predictable.

Just understand, as the article states, that there's more to total cost of ownership than software license fees. What's important is that your company monitors productivity metrics, and makes good decisions based on objective data. For a lot of software, the license fee is nominal compared to the productivity loss. There are controlled scenarios that you can run to get reasonably accurate measures on this. Most are common sense, but if you need some pointers feel free to reach out privately:

email: john@excellentmanagementsystems.com

Finally, don't believe anybody who asserts the motivations of somebody who writes a white paper, even if they're put in a positive light. Nobody here knows why I wrote that article, and making an irresponsible statement like that is illegal regardless of the informality of this forum; just know it's my expert opinion based on a long tenure in this industry. Under no circumstances would I author something I don't truly believe!

Thanks, and take care.

-John

by nicknielsen

An expert opinion is almost always worth more to the expert than it is to anybody else.

Been the expert.

by santeewelding

I am unimpressed with your mention of first class. I am impressed only with first-class form and formality, of which I see none.

I see crass.

Basheer is to be excused. You are not.

by charliespencer

"If you're a developer, your company probably spends a good deal of money on you every day in the hopes that you're as productive as possible. And yes, I'm making a general statement that freeware software has a tendency to make developers less productive than commercial software."

Not everyone is a developer. basheerpt is applying your position to all freeware, regardless of what it does or who uses it. He's rejecting apps simply because they are free, and using your white paper as justification.

"Of course you can point to examples like Apache, Linux, Java, MySQL, and all the other iconic apps that freeware zealots point to when they're trying to make their argument. They'll also reference the devil incarnate of software, Microsoft, the likes of which have ruined the integrity of our software system with their empty promises and beta software that they market as the panacea for all your problems."

You're referencing the extreme position. Not all open source advocates view MS as the devil. You might as well say all Muslims hate the U.S. Regarding beta software, I'll back you all the way on it being inappropriately market, but there are plenty of commercial developers who market vaporware.

by charliespencer

If you don't want people to talk about you when they don't know you, stop posting opinions, advertisements, or white papers on the Internet. Some stranger might read them and express differing opinions, or ask questions about what your opinions are based on, or make inferences about your motivations.

I didn't drag you into this; basheerpt did. Had he not, I wouldn't know of your white paper, your company, or you. When basheerpt linked to your white paper, I read it and notice a lack of what I consider supporting information. No mention of specific freeware products you've tried or specific problems you encountered. At this site, members are expected to support their opinions with facts. While your white paper wasn't written for this site, a member introduced it as why he why opposed freeware. By doing so, he made your arguments his, and subject to the expectations of the membership. I expected him to respond as to why he agreed with you, but you'll do nicely.

I don't expect a white paper to get into complete details, but yours is full of vague statements like the ones I quoted. How does freeware sap productivity any more than proprietary software? I've seen plenty of lost time bloating up a PowerPoint presentation with unnecessary effects.

That "you get what you pay for" stuff? Funny how I'm running a free browser, two free anti-malware apps, and a free web design tools that I find superior to the proprietary apps they replaced. (Firefox vs. IE, MS Security Essentials and ThreatFire vs. McAfee, MS Visual Web Developer Express vs. Sitespinner.) Your web page has plenty of free articles; are they inherently inferior because you don't charge for them? The one linked to by basheerpt certainly isn't any better supported than the support you claim freeware lacks.

Your statement about freeware being unsupported is just plain old-fashioned vanilla wrong. Plenty of companies make money selling support for freeware. IBM, Novell, and your business partner Quest, for three. (Incidentally, if freeware is inferior, why does Quest support Linux???)

What did I say that set you off? Is it not true that every freeware app installed instead of the proprietary ones you and your partner support is income lost to you? Was it my assertion that you wrote a white paper to drum up business? If wasn't for that reason, why did you write it? General education of the public? Pull the other one; it's got bells on.

If wasn't either of those statements, what was it? If you think I crossed the line, either develop a thicker skin or stay off the web. It's a big Internet, and I'm not even close to the nastiest guy out there. It's usually best to ignore personal attacks; otherwise you just draw attention to them. Stick with responding to questions of fact.

Oh, and welcome to TR. Seriously.

by santeewelding

Go back and take the course over. Looks like you missed important parts of it.

Don't nobody get away with nothing on TR.

by hal 9000

If you already have a Software Package that fills that function then it's probably not a great idea to install another application that effectively does the same thing. Though none the less it should be tested to see which is the better option for that particular business. If the Free Software is more efficient it's probably a better option, and if it is a well known package it's likely to be very secure and have a Service Contract Available which you or the Business can buy.

[i]But, recently we get a single request from a user to give them access of some free software which will help his daily work very much.[/i]

This is probably the important bit of your post as it is showing that there is a need for a application like this by at least one user in this Business. The entire idea behind using computers in business is to cut down costs and improve productivity. Computers cut down costs by requiring fewer people to do the same job and the more efficient that you make the systems the more money they save.

To that end you need the best applications for the companies needs and that covers all users.

[i]This software is against the policy[/i]

The Policy then needs altering if it is adversely impacting on Productivity.

[i]and i dont like such free softwares to install users computers[/i]

That's entirely a personal opinion brought about by lack of knowledge and supported by Fear of the Unknown. While whatever [b]Free[/b] app has been asked for may not be the best option it is IT responsibility to find something that works for the business and suits the needs of that business. IT is a Service Industry and we [b]Support[/b] End Users we are not the beginning and end of all business related activity we are there to cut costs and increase productivity. To do that we need to be flexible and more importantly supply solutions for the End Users.

[i]which will increase the requests and am afraid it will be a support headache and un manageable.[/i]

If you are not supplying the End Users needs then you are not the right person to fill that position. There is [b]No One Size Fits All[/b] and there is no single company who can supply every need so we as IT professionals need to shop around play with different products and then submit what we find to those higher up to make the decisions as to what gets used. If we set policy to make our lives easier it not only costs the company money but taken to the logical end we wouldn't supply power Leads with any Computer that way the End Users couldn't mess them up causing us added grief.

As you didn't mention the actual package requested it's hard to say one way or the other and then again it also depends on the Type of Business as Instant Messaging Applications are not acceptable in a Medical Center or a Financial Institution where Money is Controlled. But if there was a request to install Open Office when there is no other Office Product available I would see it as [b]Unreasonable[/b] to refuse unless there was another option available.

Col

by johnweathington

Nick,

If you believe that then you're missing the whole point. You're focusing more on what angle I'm coming from, than the usefulness and applicability of the information I'm putting out there.

When I buy and read a book (presumably written by an expert), and I purchase a lot of books, I'm not concerned about how much money the author's making on the book. I'm concerned that I'm getting my money's worth.

What I concentrate on whenever I author an article like this is, how I can convey the most value from my experience, to anybody who decides to read this.

Sorry you didn't like my article, but I'd appreciate it if you would just state your opinions on the matter instead of attacking my intentions.

You and Palmetto can have the last word on this if you want. I've said what I wanted to say here.

-John

by nicknielsen

Almost every white paper I have ever seen has been prominently sponsored by a company or agency who provides services or equipment relative to the subject of that paper. This gives the (admittedly cynical) impression that the author has an agenda, usually to try to sell equipment or promote services. That no doubt colored my initial response.

On the other hand, I dismiss your published opinion in the same manner you dismiss this forum and audience: the usefulness of the information in the white paper in question is worth what I paid for it.

This discussion is closed to new replies.