Post by Doug L on Sept 10, 2012 14:51:57 GMT -5
Discussion point, formal systems management or ad hoc.
As home computer users--many of us use an array of "free" software applications and utilities, even operating systems. The risks of using insupportable products of this nature in the home environment are marginal and we understand we are at the mercy of the developer, who may or may not fully support their creations as time goes along.
On the other hand, the business environment, if it goes beyond the scope of one or even a few connected computers soon becomes a critical business platform.
It is at that juncture one needs to consider the ramifications of building the foundation of the companies information technology and systems management processing on the back of what could be considered "insupportable" free or almost free products which by by definition--cannot be wholly supported.
While it is true that even commercial products come and go or experience development glitches and "undocumented features", it is far likely you will NOT be left swinging in the wind if things go awry.
This point is critical to the core of the debate.
Reduced to fundamental issues, it is simply a risk analysis exercise, do the benefits of "free" skunk-ware, freeware, open-source, and other non-commercial products outweigh the potential stability and sustainability of commercial offerings?
Yes... there are horror stories about both, yet probability needs to be considered.
As any Technology client service "help desk" personal will tell you, not establishing a cohesive service agreement between the support folk and the user community is a fast way to "low availability" demise.
Once the understandings of the service agreement have "buy in" all around, one usually is assured of a supportable, stable computing environment responsive to need and cost effective.
It is within said service agreement you will find a statement concerning the use of unapproved product... a level of service known as "best effort", in other words here is a quarter, call someone who cares.
The insidious impact of unapproved product is seen in the indirect consequence of introducing them into a "locked down" DT standard image environment... one that has been crafted, integrated, tested, documented and approved--many elements of that go by the board once compromised by feral applications... or unapproved tweaking.
The result of those may be startling compared to the seemingly harmless introduction of them. In other words unintended consequences are common and often disruptive to smooth computer operations.
It is well worth considering the debate before "wild west" approaches overwhelm your computing platform leaving it in a state of needing many quarters, in a place where it ceases to be a useful tool and becomes a cost and frustration liability.
I wish I had a quarter for every time I heard, "I use it at home, it works good there!"
The test is... if Joe the techie one quits, can someone easily take the reigns and sustain service?
(from the "word to the wise" file)
As home computer users--many of us use an array of "free" software applications and utilities, even operating systems. The risks of using insupportable products of this nature in the home environment are marginal and we understand we are at the mercy of the developer, who may or may not fully support their creations as time goes along.
On the other hand, the business environment, if it goes beyond the scope of one or even a few connected computers soon becomes a critical business platform.
It is at that juncture one needs to consider the ramifications of building the foundation of the companies information technology and systems management processing on the back of what could be considered "insupportable" free or almost free products which by by definition--cannot be wholly supported.
While it is true that even commercial products come and go or experience development glitches and "undocumented features", it is far likely you will NOT be left swinging in the wind if things go awry.
This point is critical to the core of the debate.
Reduced to fundamental issues, it is simply a risk analysis exercise, do the benefits of "free" skunk-ware, freeware, open-source, and other non-commercial products outweigh the potential stability and sustainability of commercial offerings?
Yes... there are horror stories about both, yet probability needs to be considered.
As any Technology client service "help desk" personal will tell you, not establishing a cohesive service agreement between the support folk and the user community is a fast way to "low availability" demise.
Once the understandings of the service agreement have "buy in" all around, one usually is assured of a supportable, stable computing environment responsive to need and cost effective.
It is within said service agreement you will find a statement concerning the use of unapproved product... a level of service known as "best effort", in other words here is a quarter, call someone who cares.
The insidious impact of unapproved product is seen in the indirect consequence of introducing them into a "locked down" DT standard image environment... one that has been crafted, integrated, tested, documented and approved--many elements of that go by the board once compromised by feral applications... or unapproved tweaking.
The result of those may be startling compared to the seemingly harmless introduction of them. In other words unintended consequences are common and often disruptive to smooth computer operations.
It is well worth considering the debate before "wild west" approaches overwhelm your computing platform leaving it in a state of needing many quarters, in a place where it ceases to be a useful tool and becomes a cost and frustration liability.
I wish I had a quarter for every time I heard, "I use it at home, it works good there!"
The test is... if Joe the techie one quits, can someone easily take the reigns and sustain service?
(from the "word to the wise" file)