Knowlegde Through Fun Welcome To Mady's Site.

Due to the different development models, Program Managers can achieve
many benefits over traditional COTS by using OSS. Popular open source
products have access to extensive technical expertise, and this
enables the software to achieve a high level of efficiency, using less
lines of code than its COTS counterparts. The rapid release rate of
OSS distributes fixes and patches quickly, potentially an order of
magnitude faster than those of commercial software. OSS is relatively
easy to manage because it often incorporates elements such as central
administration and remote management. Because the source code is
publicly available, Program Managers can have the code tailored to
meet their specific needs and tightly control system resources.

Moreover, Program Managers can re-use code written by others for
similar tasks or purposes. This enables Program Managers to
concentrate on developing the features unique to their current task,
instead of spending their effort on rethinking and re-writing code
that has already been developed by others.
Code re-use reduces development time and provides predictable results.
With access to the source code, the lifetime of OSS systems and their
upgrades can be extended indefinitely. In contrast, the lifetime of
traditional COTS systems and their upgrades cannot be extended if the
vendor does not share its code and either goes out of business, raises
its prices prohibitively, or reduces the quality of the software
prohibitively. The open source model builds open standards and
achieves a high degree of interoperability. While traditional COTS
typically depend on monopoly support with one company providing
support and "holding all the cards" (i.e., access to the code) for a
piece of software, the publicly available source code for OSS enables
many vendors to learn the platform and provide support. Because OSS
vendors compete against one another to provide support, the quality of
support increases while the end-user cost of receiving the support
decreases.
Open source can create support that lasts as long as there is demand,
even if one support vendor goes out of business. For government
acquisition purposes, OSS adds potential as a second-source
"bargaining chip" to improve COTS support. OSS can be a long-term
viable solution with significant benefits, but there are issues and
risks to Program Managers. Poor code often results if the open source
project is too small or fails to attract the interest of enough
skilled developers; thus, Program Managers should make sure that the
OSS community is large, talented, and well organized to offer a viable
alternative to COTS. Highly technical, skilled developers tend to
focus on the technical user at the expense of the non-technical user.
As a result, OSS tends to have a relatively weak graphical user
interface (GUI) and fewer compatible applications, making it more
difficult to use and less practical, in particular, for desktop
applications (although some OSS products are greatly improving in this
area). Version control can become an issue if the OSS system requires
integration and development.

As new versions of the OSS are released, Program Managers need to make
sure that the versions to be integrated are compatible, ensure that
all developers are working with the proper version, and keep track of
changes made to the software.
Without a formal corporate structure, OSS faces a risk of
fragmentation of the code base, or code forking, which transpires when
multiple, inconsistent versions of the project's code base evolve.
This can occur when developers try to create alternative means for
their code to play a more significant role than achieved in the base
product. Sometimes fragmentation occurs for good reasons (e.g., if the
maintainer is doing a poor job) and sometimes it occurs for bad
reasons (e.g., a personality conflict between lead developers). The
Linux kernel code has not yet forked, and this can be attributed to
its accepted leadership structure, open membership and long-term
contribution potential, GNU General Public License (GPL) licensing
eliminating the economic motivations for fragmentation, and the
subsequent threat of a fragmented pool of developers.
Ninety-nine percent of Linux distributed code is the same. The small
amount of fragmentation between different Linux distributions is good
because it allows them to cater to different segments. Users benefit
by choosing a Linux distribution that best meets their needs. Finally,
there is a risk of companies developing competitive strategies
specifically focused against OSS.
When comparing long-term economic costs and benefits of open source
usage and maintenance to traditional COTS, the winner varies according
to each specific use and set of circumstances. Typically, open source
compares favorably in many cases for server and embedded system
implementations that may require some customization, but fares no
better than COTS for typical desktop applications.