[PLUG] HB2892 Made The Oregonian

[Steven A. Adams]

On Fri, 2003-04-04 at 13:09, Brian Beattie wrote:
> > At first glance, Section 1, paragraph 2, sub-paragraph d and e seem to
> > be fair mandates - I believe they are. Unfortunately it puts the state
> > in a situation where there will be no additional purchases of MS
> > platforms. This will force all of the applications that have been
> > developed in that environment to be rewritten to open standards. There
> > are many ( MANY ) applications in the states inventory that rely in MS
> > front, middle and back-end platforms that will require rewrite in order
> > to comply with this language.
> > 
> > Here's the excerpt:
> > 
> >   (d) Avoid the acquisition of products that do not comply with
> > open standards for interoperability or data storage; and
> >   (e) Avoid the acquisition of products that are known to make
> > unauthorized transfers of information to, or permit unauthorized
> > control of or modification to state government's computer systems
> > by, parties outside the control of state government. + }
> >  
> > 
> > The effect on MS is not the only issue here. What about the huge volume
> > of CICS, TSO, MVS and like mainframe apps that we all rely on? The
> > impact there is more than money, it comes down to the fact that no
> > company has been successful at recreating mainframe apps in a
> > client/server environment and been able to sustain the requirements.
> > 
> > There you have it!
> > 
> 
> I disagree, the cost of converting software is a reason to buy
> proprietary software.  The law does not require the use of FOSS, just
> that it be considered and the be a reason for not using FOSS.
> 

But the law does prohibit the use of software that functions as is
described in sub-paragraphs d and e of Section 1 paragraph 2 ( if it
does not prohibit this then why does it contain this language? ). This
fact, in effect, forces the state to buy platforms that do not act like
this, thus removing Windows from consideration. Once it's determined
that Windows is not an option, the application components are going to
have to be upgraded to an environment that incorporates fair and
reasonable practices.

Again, I agree with the spirit and language included in the bill. I'm
only speaking up to raise awareness that, while it is the right thing to
do, it is not going to be very budget friendly.

>  
> Steven A. Adams <stevea at nwtechops.com>