Re: [Ubuntu-be] Fwd: SOCIALWARE AND OPEN SOURCE
Hi, thank you for taking the time to represent us :) I suppose you have already made the suggestion of contacting Canonical for possible collaboration (like free or cheaper supports for NGO). P. On 7/11/07, Serge van Ginderachter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi All, I received more feedback from Socialware, read further on for the forwarded mail. I'm pleased to notice that they took the time to dive into the list archives and to respond to several issues who were thrown on the list only. I will answer them as being appointed to represent ubuntu-be, as Mark VDB already confirmed. Serge Forwarded Message From: Bernard Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Serge van Ginderachter, Ginsys' [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: SOCIALWARE AND OPEN SOURCE Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 10:37:47 +0200 Dear Mr van Ginderachter, I have read quite interesting forum exchanges about our activities on Ubuntu-be. As mentioned in my prior mail I am definitely open to exploring cooperation possibilities with Ubuntu-be. However before going further will you please share this mail with your colleagues of Ubuntu-be and confirm that you are the contact person representing your organization. Here are some clarification statements about SOCALware's mission: First of all let me assure you that SOCIALware was not created by Microsoft and that we are not sponsored by Microsoft or by CISCO in any manner. How did it start? Working as a volunteer and helping several NPOs, I measured the extent of the IT issues they were facing and looked for a structural solution that could rapidly help the NPOs obtaining an appropriate and efficient operational environment. I did not look for THE solution, but to A solution, most particularly taking into account the speed of deployment of any solution as well as the final objective. The primary short term issue to be addressed was the affordability of professional IT software and hardware while preserving continuity of existing environments. That is why the SOCIALware project was started. The initial beneficiary target was the Development NGOs for which we received the support of the federations and of the DGCD. After two years of operations, the DGCD considers this project to have one of the best overall returns (social value net of any grant and charge). On the donor side, we negotiated with the suppliers whose products were most demanded. Microsoft and CISCO responded positively. Be assured that quite some time and efforts were needed to convince these major suppliers of the project value proposition. Contracts with new donors are currently well under way. Since July 2006, the project has been extended to Non Profit Sector (NPOs with a clear social aim). In this wider context we received the support of the King Baudouin Foundation. You will easily understand that our mission, scope and priorities have been thoroughly discussed with the Foundation. Some of you intend to contact the Foundation - feel free to do so if you believe it appropriate. Thanks to the project, the Belgian NPO community saved more than 2 millions EUR so far, an encouragement for us and to our supporters. Moreover, as this project was a European premiere, it is now replicated in other countries based on local partnerships. Vis-à-vis the Open Source products, our position has been that these solutions were quite well known and had a wide web coverage already, so we choose not devoting our scarce resources, mostly volunteers, to address already solved problems and rather concentrated our efforts on what was unresolved so far, i.e. getting donated products from vendors on behalf of the NGO community. We hardly saw what added value we might have in distributing Open Source products at this stage, but on this point we certainly would appreciate your views. This is a key point for us, as we cannot simply advertise a product without a significant added value in the process; else we would have to publish a list of any available product to treat them in an even way. We also declined to advertise several product offerings based on open source, but with proprietary layers which are bundled with support contracts: taken as a whole these offers were far from open because they actually made the buyer captive of a single supplier for any maintenance and support. However we have clearly nothing against Open Source products and we use some of them for our own operations. And given the noise on the line we may have a position statement about Open Source products on our web site in the future. But in any case, the choice of the solution (Open Source or not, Supplier X or Y) rests and should rest with the NPO itself, it is not our mission to influence this choice in any way – we only eliminate
Re: [Ubuntu-be] Fwd: SOCIALWARE AND OPEN SOURCE
2007/7/12, mongolito404 [EMAIL PROTECTED]: thank you for taking the time to represent us :) indeed structural solution that could rapidly help the NPOs obtaining an appropriate and efficient operational environment. I did not look for THE solution, but to A solution, most particularly taking into account the speed of deployment of any solution as well as the final objective. this solution is not independent The primary short term issue to be addressed was the affordability of professional IT software and hardware while preserving continuity of existing environments. this is a very strong demand that does not apply to many oraganization that had no IT before, and to me that goes well beyond the first objective. Since July 2006, the project has been extended to Non Profit Sector (NPOs with a clear social aim). In this wider context we received the support of the King Baudouin Foundation. You will easily understand that our mission, scope and priorities have been thoroughly discussed with the Foundation. Some of you intend to contact the Foundation - feel free to do so if you believe it appropriate. how does he know ? We could do it with them before as suggested. Vis-à-vis the Open Source products, our position has been that these solutions were quite well known and had a wide web coverage already, so we choose not devoting our scarce resources, mostly volunteers, to address already solved problems and rather concentrated our efforts on what was unresolved so far, i.e. getting donated products from vendors on behalf of the NGO community. I do not believe in this. Microsoft products have a much wider coverage, and advertising today than free software. We hardly saw what added value we might have in distributing Open Source products at this stage, but on this point we certainly would appreciate your views. propose choice and tools that do not link the users to proprietary vendors that look for later ways to keep these users captives. This is a key point for us, as we cannot simply advertise a product without a significant added value in the process; else we would have to publish a list of any available product to treat them in an even way. We also declined to advertise several product offerings based on open source, but with proprietary layers which are bundled with support contracts: taken as a whole these offers were far from open because they actually made the buyer captive of a single supplier for any maintenance and support. But in any case, the choice of the solution (Open Source or not, Supplier X or Y) rests and should rest with the NPO itself, it is not our mission to influence this choice in any way – we only eliminate some financial constraints out of such a selection process so that the NPO decision can be based on sheer technical, benefits, or strategic considerations from their own perspective. by proposing only one toolset, they do not really give the choice to the users IMHO I hope that this brief update sheds some light on our mission and code of conduct. some. I just gave some ideas of an answer, and I am really persuaded that we need to find a proposition to socialware that can align with this mail. I would with pleasure help and contribute to this in september Thanks, Nicolas -- Nicolas Pettiaux - email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Utiliser des formats ouverts et des logiciels libres - http://www.passeralinux.org. Pour la bureautique, les seuls formats ISO sont ceux de http://fr.openoffice.org -- ubuntu-be mailing list / mailto:ubuntu-be@lists.ubuntu.com You can find list info and your subscription configuration options at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-be
[Ubuntu-be] Fwd: SOCIALWARE AND OPEN SOURCE
Hi All, I received more feedback from Socialware, read further on for the forwarded mail. I'm pleased to notice that they took the time to dive into the list archives and to respond to several issues who were thrown on the list only. I will answer them as being appointed to represent ubuntu-be, as Mark VDB already confirmed. Serge Forwarded Message From: Bernard Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Serge van Ginderachter, Ginsys' [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: SOCIALWARE AND OPEN SOURCE Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 10:37:47 +0200 Dear Mr van Ginderachter, I have read quite interesting forum exchanges about our activities on Ubuntu-be. As mentioned in my prior mail I am definitely open to exploring cooperation possibilities with Ubuntu-be. However before going further will you please share this mail with your colleagues of Ubuntu-be and confirm that you are the contact person representing your organization. Here are some clarification statements about SOCALware’s mission: First of all let me assure you that SOCIALware was not created by Microsoft and that we are not sponsored by Microsoft or by CISCO in any manner. How did it start? Working as a volunteer and helping several NPOs, I measured the extent of the IT issues they were facing and looked for a structural solution that could rapidly help the NPOs obtaining an appropriate and efficient operational environment. I did not look for THE solution, but to A solution, most particularly taking into account the speed of deployment of any solution as well as the final objective. The primary short term issue to be addressed was the affordability of professional IT software and hardware while preserving continuity of existing environments. That is why the SOCIALware project was started. The initial beneficiary target was the Development NGOs for which we received the support of the federations and of the DGCD. After two years of operations, the DGCD considers this project to have one of the best overall returns (social value net of any grant and charge). On the donor side, we negotiated with the suppliers whose products were most demanded. Microsoft and CISCO responded positively. Be assured that quite some time and efforts were needed to convince these major suppliers of the project value proposition. Contracts with new donors are currently well under way. Since July 2006, the project has been extended to Non Profit Sector (NPOs with a clear social aim). In this wider context we received the support of the King Baudouin Foundation. You will easily understand that our mission, scope and priorities have been thoroughly discussed with the Foundation. Some of you intend to contact the Foundation - feel free to do so if you believe it appropriate. Thanks to the project, the Belgian NPO community saved more than 2 millions EUR so far, an encouragement for us and to our supporters. Moreover, as this project was a European premiere, it is now replicated in other countries based on local partnerships. Vis-à-vis the Open Source products, our position has been that these solutions were quite well known and had a wide web coverage already, so we choose not devoting our scarce resources, mostly volunteers, to address already solved problems and rather concentrated our efforts on what was unresolved so far, i.e. getting donated products from vendors on behalf of the NGO community. We hardly saw what added value we might have in distributing Open Source products at this stage, but on this point we certainly would appreciate your views. This is a key point for us, as we cannot simply advertise a product without a significant added value in the process; else we would have to publish a list of any available product to treat them in an even way. We also declined to advertise several product offerings based on open source, but with proprietary layers which are bundled with support contracts: taken as a whole these offers were far from open because they actually made the buyer captive of a single supplier for any maintenance and support. However we have clearly nothing against Open Source products and we use some of them for our own operations. And given the noise on the line we may have a position statement about Open Source products on our web site in the future. But in any case, the choice of the solution (Open Source or not, Supplier X or Y) rests and should rest with the NPO itself, it is not our mission to influence this choice in any way – we only eliminate some financial constraints out of such a selection process so that the NPO decision can be based on sheer technical, benefits, or strategic considerations from their own perspective. I hope that this brief update sheds some light on our mission and code of conduct. Best regards, Bernard Martin
