[OSGeo-Discuss] (no subject)

Sat Mar 25 10:06:59 PDT 2017

It is important to note that the cost of licences in a solution (i.e. something more than a simple desktop implementation) are only a part of the overall cost and in many cases, in my experience, a small part. 

Implementation, customisation, integration, training, ongoing support, maintenance and hosting are the main costs regardless of whether the underlying software is proprietary or open source

My experience of selling to the public sector is that, on occasions, proprietary solutions have been lower cost than open source. 

Steven

> On 24 Mar 2017, at 19:00, discuss-request at lists.osgeo.org wrote:
> 
> Send Discuss mailing list submissions to
>    discuss at lists.osgeo.org
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>    https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>    discuss-request at lists.osgeo.org
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>    discuss-owner at lists.osgeo.org
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Discuss digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
>   1. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
>      properitery product as Open ? (Suchith Anand)
>   2. Re: Wiki: InfrastructurePreferencesStatusQuo - call for
>      update (Vicky Vergara)
>   3. Ideas for the building global research agenda for Geospatial
>      Data Science (Suchith Anand)
>   4. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
>      properitery product as Open? (Steven Feldman)
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 21:51:53 +0000
> From: Suchith Anand <Suchith.Anand at nottingham.ac.uk>
> To: María Arias de Reyna <delawen+osgeo at gmail.com>, Luís Moreira
>    de Sousa <luis.de.sousa at protonmail.ch>
> Cc: "discuss at lists.osgeo.org" <discuss at lists.osgeo.org>
> Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor
>    to market thier properitery product as Open ?
> Message-ID:
>    <HE1PR0602MB2793CA6DC465343184D8EAAC873F0 at HE1PR0602MB2793.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com>
>    
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> 
> +1 .
> 
> 
> I am also interested in how we can protect taxpayers money in this. The need for cost savings by using Open source GIS software will help the local authorities and various government departments across Europe in reducing huge licence fee costs for proprietary software and  Government and taxpayers as a whole will benefit from cost efficiencies, reduce the cost of lock-in to suppliers and products. This is especially important for future IT investments (for example Cloud Computing) , so that more options are explored and choices available. I presented my ideas on the importance of having a National level strategy for Open Principles in Geospatial [1] . Overview slides are at https://www.slideshare.net/SuchithAnand/national-level-strategy-for-open-principles-in-geospatial
> 
> 
> 
> It is my duty as a global citizen to work on this  so that all our future generations are empowered fully. Let us plan to meet and discuss ideas at FOSS4G -Europe for making OSGeo European chapter.
> 
> Best wishes,
> 
> Suchith
> 
> 
> 
> [1] http://opensourcegeospatial.icaci.org/2016/03/national-level-strategy-for-open-principles-in-geospatial-ideas-and-inputs-needed/
> 
> ________________________________________
> From: Discuss <discuss-bounces at lists.osgeo.org> on behalf of María Arias de Reyna <delawen+osgeo at gmail.com>
> Sent: 23 March 2017 9:20 AM
> To: Luís Moreira de Sousa
> Cc: discuss at lists.osgeo.org
> Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier properitery product as Open ?
> 
> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 9:30 AM, Luís Moreira de Sousa <luis.de.sousa at protonmail.ch<mailto:luis.de.sousa at protonmail.ch>> wrote:
> 
> I believe we need a regulatory framework for "open source" labelling; something like the EU regulation 1169/2011 [2] for organic farming. It not only sets the criteria for farmers to label their products, as it actively prevents others from falsely claiming to that criteria.
> 
> 
> +1 Restarting the movement for the european chapter to be able to lobby for this...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee
> and may contain confidential information. If you have received this
> message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it. 
> 
> Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this
> message or in any attachment.  Any views or opinions expressed by the
> author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the
> University of Nottingham.
> 
> This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
> attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your
> computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email
> communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as
> permitted by UK legislation.
> 
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20170323/b5c26dd4/attachment-0001.html>
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 2
> Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 19:12:47 -0600
> From: Vicky Vergara <vicky at georepublic.de>
> To: OSGeo Discuss list <discuss at lists.osgeo.org>
> Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Wiki: InfrastructurePreferencesStatusQuo
>    - call for update
> Message-ID:
>    <CAK_FzuVEcFLgyxKiML8-qOeNv7fAYJfN1KF2at0svANQiXCMyA at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> 
> Added a line for pgRouting
> 
> On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 2:14 PM, Cameron Shorter <cameron.shorter at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> 
>> +1 Greatly insightful slide deck from Maxi about Open principles in
>> general and OSGeo in particular. Thanks for sharing.
>> 
>> Cameron
>> 
>> On 22/3/17 4:02 am, Jody Garnett wrote:
>> 
>> That is a *great* talk, and shows a lot of areas where we can improve.
>> 
>> There has been a consistent call for "incubation" to continue to hold
>> projects accountable to OSGeo standards. I have resisted these calls as I
>> view incubation as an outreach activity - part of our mission to promote
>> open/transparent software development.
>> 
>> Still that is great to have an external review; is that review public?
>> 
>> --
>> Jody Garnett
>> 
>> On 21 March 2017 at 01:18, Venkatesh Raghavan <
>> raghavan at media.osaka-cu.ac.jp> wrote:
>> 
>>> Maxi also made an excelling presentation on related topic
>>> at FOSS4G-Asia 2017. The presentation is available at
>>> 
>>> http://www.slideshare.net/cannata/massimiliano-cannata-keyno
>>> te-foss4gasia-2017
>>> 
>>> Best
>>> 
>>> Venka
>>> 
>>>> On 2017/03/20 22:08, Jeff McKenna wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Actually Maxi and I did a recent thorough research into OSGeo project
>>>> use of infrastructure, by each project, and it was published as a paper (or
>>>> soon to be).  In the short term I know Maxi has submitted it as a talk for
>>>> FOSS4G-Europe.  It's good to take a step back and review old processes.
>>>> Actually we hope that that was a start of a regular OSGeo project 'health
>>>> checkup', which obviously is very needed.  For example, it was quite
>>>> shocking how many current OSGeo projects are functioning without any
>>>> regular Project Steering Committee meetings, or even a visible Project
>>>> Steering Committee.  I am sure Maxi will be sharing those results at
>>>> FOSS4G-E.
>>>> 
>>>> -jeff
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Discuss mailing list
>>> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Discuss mailing listDiscuss at lists.osgeo.orghttps://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> Cameron Shorter
>> M +61 419 142 254
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Discuss mailing list
>> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> Georepublic UG (haftungsbeschränkt)
> Salzmannstraße 44,
> 81739 München, Germany
> 
> Vicky Vergara
> Operations Research
> 
> eMail: vicky at georepublic.de
> Web: https://georepublic.info
> 
> Tel: +49 (089) 4161 7698-1
> Fax: +49 (089) 4161 7698-9
> 
> Commercial register: Amtsgericht München, HRB 181428
> CEO: Daniel Kastl
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20170323/1a31400c/attachment-0001.html>
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 3
> Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 11:05:12 +0000
> From: Suchith Anand <Suchith.Anand at nottingham.ac.uk>
> To: "discuss at lists.osgeo.org" <discuss at lists.osgeo.org>,
>    "geoforall at lists.osgeo.org" <geoforall at lists.osgeo.org>
> Subject: [OSGeo-Discuss] Ideas for the building global research agenda
>    for Geospatial Data Science
> Message-ID:
>    <HE1PR0602MB279314835A1757DE8B5ADD1D873E0 at HE1PR0602MB2793.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com>
>    
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> 
> Dear colleague,
> 
> The Geospatial IG of the Research Data Alliance will be meeting in Barcelona on 5th April 2017 to keep building ideas for the global research agenda for Geospatial Data Science.I am pleased to send the final meeting agenda and invite all interested to join.
> 
> The meeting objectives are to :
> 
> * Discussions on Geospatial Data Science - Vision 2030 [1]
> * Plan next steps from OpenCitySmart and UrbanGeoBigData [2]
> 
> * Ideas for Education programs for Geospatial Data Science
> 
> * Discuss Ideas for starting new WGs in Transport Data
> 
> Meeting agenda
> 
> This meeting aims to build upon our previous meetings and draft agenda below
> 
> * Updates on Geospatial IG - Suchith Anand (GODAN/University of Nottingham)
> * Discussions on new WG in Transport Data that is in progress - Beth Zeitler (Millennium Challenge Corporation, USA)
> * Coverage: Standards for Big Earth Data - Peter Baumann (Jacobs University)
> * Enabling the re-use of spatial information across domains - Andrea Perego (JRC, European Commission)
> * Copernicus EU Programme - Andrea Perego (JRC, European Commission)
> * Joint W3C/OGC Spatial Data on the Web WG - Andrea Perego (JRC, European Commission)
> * Discussions on Geospatial Data Science - Vision 2030 - chaired by Suchith Anand (GODAN/University of Nottingham)
> * The Rise of OpenStreetMap as a World Mapping Agency [3] - discussions chaired by Suchith Anand (GODAN/University of Nottingham)
> * NASA Europa Challenge 2017 and OpenCitySmart updates - Suchith Anand (GODAN/University of Nottingham)
> 
> * Updates on Capacity Development from IGAD meeting - Suchith Anand (GODAN/University of Nottingham)
> 
> * Ideas/updates on Training programs for Geospatial Data Science - All
> * Ideas for specific actions /new WGs in Geospatial IG - All
> 
> There will be gotomeeting facility for those interested to join remotely. I am waiting for the RDA hosts to send me the details of this and it will updated in the main website at
> https://www.rd-alliance.org/ig-geospatial-rda-9th-plenary-meeting
> 
> I look forward to welcome you all for productive discussions and actions for building  the global research agenda for Geospatial Data Science.
> 
> Best wishes,
> 
> Suchith
> 
> 
> 
> [1] http://www.geoconnexion.com/uploads/publication_pdfs/uk_v15i18-058-059-Op951AF3.pdf
> 
> [2] https://www.devex.com/news/how-nasa-and-the-un-are-using-location-intelligence-to-build-smart-cities-in-developing-countries-89721
> [3] http://opensourcegeospatial.icaci.org/2017/03/the-rise-of-openstreetmap-as-a-world-mapping-agency/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee
> and may contain confidential information. If you have received this
> message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it. 
> 
> Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this
> message or in any attachment.  Any views or opinions expressed by the
> author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the
> University of Nottingham.
> 
> This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
> attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your
> computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email
> communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as
> permitted by UK legislation.
> 
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20170324/bcb9f2fe/attachment-0001.html>
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 4
> Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 16:48:20 +0000
> From: Steven Feldman <shfeldman at gmail.com>
> To: OSGeo Discussions <discuss at lists.osgeo.org>
> Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor
>    to market thier properitery product as Open?
> Message-ID: <DA3DA905-6C65-4D42-A9F9-5132F9F7845C at gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> 
> I wanted to respond to Suchith’s query but I found the strength and length of my thoughts to be too much to include in an email. I was also keen to share them with a wider audience than the regulars on this list.
> 
> So if you are interested in my views on the use of the adjective ‘open’ you can read my post on "Esri isn’t evil” at http://knowwhereconsulting.co.uk/blog/esri-isnt-evil/ <http://knowwhereconsulting.co.uk/blog/esri-isnt-evil/>
> 
> Feel free to rant at me in the comments section of my blog or back her on the list
> 
> May the FOSS be with you
> ______
> Steven
> 
> 
>> On 23 Mar 2017, at 19:00, board-request at lists.osgeo.org wrote:
>> 
>> Send Discuss mailing list submissions to
>>    discuss at lists.osgeo.org
>> 
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>>    https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>>    discuss-request at lists.osgeo.org
>> 
>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>>    discuss-owner at lists.osgeo.org
>> 
>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>> than "Re: Contents of Discuss digest..."
>> 
>> 
>> Today's Topics:
>> 
>>  1. Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
>>     properitery product as Open ? (Suchith Anand)
>>  2. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
>>     properitery product as Open ? (Jody Garnett)
>>  3. Re: Is it possible for proprietary GIS vendor to market their
>>     proprietary product as Open ? (Hogan, Patrick (ARC-PX))
>>  4. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to    market thier
>>     properitery product as Open ? (Kiringai Kamau)
>>  5. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
>>     properitery product as Open ? (María Arias de Reyna)
>>  6. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
>>     properitery product as Open ? (María Arias de Reyna)
>>  7. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
>>     properitery product as Open ? (María Arias de Reyna)
>>  8. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to    market thier
>>     properitery product as Open ? (Luís Moreira de Sousa)
>>  9. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
>>     properitery product as Open ? (María Arias de Reyna)
>> 10. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
>>     properitery product as Open ? (James Klassen)
>> 11. Re: Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to market thier
>>     properitery product as Open ? (Jody Garnett)
>> 12. Re: GRASS GIS video from 1987: 30th anniversary    blog post /
>>     link (Jeff McKenna)
>> 
>> 
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2017 20:15:27 +0000
>> From: Suchith Anand <Suchith.Anand at nottingham.ac.uk>
>> To: "discuss at lists.osgeo.org" <discuss at lists.osgeo.org>,
>>    "geoforall at lists.osgeo.org" <geoforall at lists.osgeo.org>
>> Subject: [OSGeo-Discuss] Is it possible for properitery GIS vendor to
>>    market thier properitery product as Open ?
>> Message-ID:
>>    <HE1PR0602MB2793B630B2ED4BC6B9032C66873C0 at HE1PR0602MB2793.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com>
>>    
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>> 
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> 
>> I have a query. If a properitery GIS vendor starts marketing thier properitery products as Open platform and software then what rights do the organisations and customers have who are mislead buying the  properitery software thinking it is open have ?  The definision of Proprietary software [1] is very clearly defined, so  how can it be possible for any properitery GIS vendor to market their  software knowingly as open platform if it is properitery?
>> 
>> 
>> This also greatly affects the business and revenues of true open source software companies .  Who is responsible for any misleading marketing that results in losses to both customers who are mislead to buy the properitery software thinking it is open  and also to other companies who do true open source business who lose out on the business opportunities? Is it right business ethics to do this?
>> 
>> 
>> Best wishes,
>> 
>> Suchith
>> 
>> 
>> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proprietary_software
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20170324/be45add5/attachment-0001.html>
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Subject: Digest Footer
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> End of Discuss Digest, Vol 123, Issue 22
> ****************************************