"Some customers and governments switched to Linux [an open source software] because it was free, and then after a couple months, they switch back because they have very high total cost of ownership," said Gregory Stewart, Microsoft's marketing and communications manager for the West Indies.

Stewart's comments were in response to assertion made by some software providers, as well as the Central Information Technology Office (CITO), a government agency.  In an interview carried in the Sunday Observer, they recommended that firms consider switching to open source for potential long-term savings.

But yesterday, Stewart argued that the consultancy fees and staff training costs associated with open source software nullified any apparent upfront benefit to the user.  While open source software is usually free of cost, users have to pay a licensing fee for systems like that offered by Microsoft.

Stewart acknowledged that there could be savings from open source software, but that this was realised "only in a few cases".  Another advantage of open source software is that it allows users to reconfigure or upgrade the programming code to increase functionality.

At issue, however, is whether the upgrading is costly, and whether it is as secure as a licensed software which does not reveal the programming code.

Microsoft is estimated to control some 90 per cent of the world's software market, though millions use open source software.

Among the open source systems are Linux, a rival to Microsoft's Windows; and Firefox, a rival to the Windows Explorer web browser.

Windows retails for about US$300 (approximately $18,000).  A medium-sized firm with 30 computers would pay US$9,000 just to have the product operating legally on its systems.  But more sophisticated software will cost more.

For instance, Microsoft Windows Server 2003 starts at US$400 but runs upwards of US$8,000 - compared with Zope a rival web server application that is free.

"What we are trying to do on our side [from Microsoft] is to sell users greater value," said Stewart.  "Yes there is an upfront cost but you have lower associated costs and more support."

The high cost of licensing software has raised concern by the Jamaica government who will be paying Microsoft some US$3 million over the next three years to "regularise" the state's desktop systems.

This is being done under an enterprise agreement signed earlier this year.  Jamaica additionally is now preparing to embark on a project to evaluate whether there is a place for open source in the public sector.

Brazil and Malaysia are two countries which have taken strong positions on implementing open source software solutions, not only in the public sector but also in the private sector.

They see it (in part) as a method of preventing huge payouts to software companies to just license software.  But Stewart maintains that saving may not be long term.

"Essentially what happens is that the information technology professionals who make that decision [to go open source] get pressured from the business executives because over time the cost adds up and the chief executive officer or the chief financial officer [complains]," he said.

http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/magazines/Business/html/20041123T200000-0500_70119_OBS_MICROSOFT_SAYS_ALTERNATIVES_COULD_COST_JA_MORE.asp