I’m thinking of ways to help people move from established software to more open, flexible forms that don’t lock them to another organization.
I’m thinking of ways to help people move from established software to more open, flexible forms that don’t lock them to another organization.
If you are thinking about transitioning an organization to open source, pricing and vendor lock-in are generally good arguments.
If you are thinking about helping individuals transition, that’s a bit more difficult. Pricing could still work, but is not always that effective. It boils down to the willingness to try something new.
In both cases projects with good documentation and a healthy community also helps, but if the open alternative lacks features, it’s a though sell.
Thanks for the reply! I was thinking of a mixture of organizations and individuals, so both of what you mention is relevant.
Another perspective I’m interested in, and why I asked here, is for anyone around that may have helped organizations/individuals make the transition, whether through discussion and/or contributions to or tools for open software to better assist adoption.
The only such transition I was involved in was switching from TFS to Git, and there was no discussion. It was the obvious thing to do and for a while we needed to support some developers who are new to Git.
So, it all depends on the type of change you want to implement. Most people don’t think much about a piece of software being open is significant. That’s why the main selling point should be the product itself. Especially in organizations openness alone is not a strong enough argument.
But with individuals, it may help to inform people about FOSS instead of just suggesting alternatives (“Do you have a moment to talk about our lord and savior Stallman/Torvalds?”). If the individual doesn’t understand or subscribe to the values, the switch may be temporary. My 2 cents. Hopefully others will come up with better tactics.