DISQUS

PJ Doland · 1 month ago

We actually develop sites for clients using both open source content management systems and custom proprietary systems.

Systems like Drupal, Joomla, and WordPress are good options when a client needs something that doesn't conflict with the basic assumptions made by the software's development community (who are catering to a general user base). If a client is willing to stay within the lines, then they can usually get 95% of what they want or need for 40% of the comparative cost. This is the preferred way of doing things whenever it will help realize the basic objectives of the project.

Sometimes, however, clients have a very particular way they need things maintained. It could be because of a need to manage a large number of idiosyncratic data-relationships. It could be the result of a very specialized internal workflow. Sometimes it's just bullheadedness on the part of an executive decisionmaker. In these situations, it's often better to go the custom route. Trying to use an open source CMS when it's not appropriate can be not only very messy, but much more expensive to maintain than a well-built custom solution.

To make sure you don't get burned, find a vendor who is both familiar with open source systems and able to identify when they are and are not appropriate. To put it another way: vendors who only work with open source content management systems tend to see every problem as a nail; vendors who never use them tend to see you as an easy mark.

MikeRT · 1 month ago

The vendors need the government space because it is so uncritical of them and so driven by CYA politics over efficiency. It's an enormous cash cow for them in a way that is proportionally superior to private business because the will to fight for the best bang for the buck isn't usually there.

CMS products are just a drop in the bucket. What we really need is for PostgreSQL or EnterpriseDB to very aggressively attack Oracle's position in the government market. Oracle is so expensive, and so overused that it would save tax payers a significantly greater amount of money.

cordblomquist · 1 month ago

You should see my recent comments to Tim Lee, reposted here http://timothyblee.com/?p=1432 as a post with his comments, that illustrate why I believe there is a bias against free software specifically in the free market non-profit community. The advocates of free software often use highly charged language and try to turn an engineering question into a political one. That politicizing has made a lot of folks suspicious of open source, something that has set advocates of freedom behind because, as you say, money has been wasted on closed-source technologies that don't stack up to open software.