People and organizations that are considering the adoption of OSS, or that need to choose among different OS products face the problem of evaluating OSS in a systematic, sound and complete way. While several proposals concerning the evaluation of costs and benefits exist, little attention has been given to the evaluation of technical qualities and, in general, to the “usage-oriented” issues. In this paper the existing proposals are examined, the different types of qualities and issues that are relevant to potential users are described, and a coherent and innovative method for the evaluation of OSS is proposed. The proposed method is expected to support the potential user in the evaluation and choice of OSS in a flexible way, taking into account all the aspects that are relevant to the user.

OpenBQR: a framework for the assessment of OSS

TAIBI, DAVIDE;LAVAZZA, LUIGI ANTONIO;MORASCA, SANDRO
2007

Abstract

People and organizations that are considering the adoption of OSS, or that need to choose among different OS products face the problem of evaluating OSS in a systematic, sound and complete way. While several proposals concerning the evaluation of costs and benefits exist, little attention has been given to the evaluation of technical qualities and, in general, to the “usage-oriented” issues. In this paper the existing proposals are examined, the different types of qualities and issues that are relevant to potential users are described, and a coherent and innovative method for the evaluation of OSS is proposed. The proposed method is expected to support the potential user in the evaluation and choice of OSS in a flexible way, taking into account all the aspects that are relevant to the user.
9780387724850
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: http://hdl.handle.net/11383/1674522
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 51
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 24
social impact