============= Group 1 Notes ============= 1. Common Scenarios - Call from a faculty member, would like package Y, investigate cost, about $20k, faculty say no funding, what next? - SHASS said we need statistical packages, who should we talk to? - Professor got others to share cost across DLCs - Want to support a functional need, but how to choose which package? -- -- 1. Common Scenarios cont. - What about web hosted/subscription software? - Can we make this a site license? Vendor calls to tell us we are paying more than site license; what's the path from here to there? - We have all sorts of desktop licenses across campus that we don't know what opportunities for cost savings exist - What is out there that's better than what I am using? - Company has academic options that aren't widely known -- -- 2. What Issues? - Hard to know what's most cost effective - How to get basic info about existing packages? - Vendor not offering useful license mode (e.g. no concurrent) - Vendors separate uses such as admin, teaching, research Sidebar: Citrix model helps get past some license issues - No easy way to figure out who else is using this software - Hitching delays to bigger license - Lack of place for advice - Determining what constitutes critical mass -- -- 2. What Issues, cont.? - Timeline for legal - Irreconcilable differences with vendor - Free software - Buggy - Encumbered or not legal - Support costs - Click-through licenses or indviduals sign licenses - People not wanting to move off (old) software - Leaving individuals & obligations - Vendor price increases - Confusion after change in status (e.g. Acrobat) -- -- 3. Factors - Diversity of DLCs - Advisory group to help make decisions (is this ACCORDiacs?) - GIR course needs - Sources of funding - Legal complications - Cost savings - MIT specials - Site to vote for software folks use -- -- 4. Most important packages - LabView - We have $ already (are you sure?) - Academic is $1k/license - Research is $5k/license - Statistical software - iLife ~ 70 FL&L - COMSOL multiphysics modeling - EndNote - Adobe products - Video editing (e.g. Final Cut Pro) == ============= Group 2 Notes ============= 1. Definition of academic software 2. Features of a working process 3. What packages are important to you? Note: Teaching and research are both important and we don't believe they are cleanly separable. -- Can you even define what academic software is? Perhaps it is more about how software is used that the application itself that defines it. - Academic software is a diverse space - Where software is used often determines whether it is academic or not - The context it is used in often determines whether it is academic or not - Who uses it often determines whether it is academic or not - How it is used often determines whether it is academic or not (i.e. Excel) - Vendor license restrictions often determin academic vs. other Should not spend too much time trying to narrow the definition. Try to be flexible. Let's not forget about support and maintenance costs (either via vendor or internal) in addition to acquisition costs. -- -- Process Notes - Process should have models for funding software - Process should have models for funding software support - Process should feed into tools that make it easy for users to know what software is available - End-users should be able to feed something into the process; shouldn't depend on who you know - This "inventory" of available software should include things that have been previously requested/talked about but not made available (i.e. cast your vote in support of previously asked for software) -- -- - Rules on how decisions are made should be transparent - List of software/inventory should be clear on: - Who can get it - How to get it - How much it costs - Immediate delivery preferable to paper mailing - Single point of entry/lookup for software list (i.e. don't segregate by Athena software, supported software, requested software) - Requests for new software can be made in the same place and are tracked (publicly if possible) -- -- - Process needs consistent mechanisms for gauging demand across MIT - Analyze current purchasing and use across MIT - Steve gives example of Libraries' EndNote proposals; did a lot to work with Procurement/SAP to look at current purchases, current $ spent, etc. Is there a way we can re-use these individual efforts as templates? - Process should have "memory" for old requests - Process should be public and report out on disposition of requests, issues, etc. -- -- - List both available and requested software; allow votes - Metrics on SW already in use - Set user expectations correctly and up front; don't raise false expectations on what can be managed or procured centrally - Aim for a consistent and clearly articulated decsion process -- -- - Capture exceptions as part of the process; i.e. if certain software are able to bypass the process or decision tree because of special funding, special attention, etc, document this so it can be re-used as part of the process later - SAP has lots of useful information on who buys what; use it for analytics, and document how it's used so others can also use in research - Can we use some of the large admin packages as templates? Oracle site license, etc? That seems to be working well - Part of process needs to document levels of support, cost of support -- -- - What organization will manage the process? Is this the software team in IS&T? Is any one group or organization coherent/comprehensive enough? - If you build a process and tools that support the process, others will start using it. If you build it, they will come. -- -- - Process should include buy/download/distribution - Look at how other universities handle this and borrow from the best - Who's the starting point? Sloan has had good results starting with/working through IS&T software team - Can this be integrated with purchasing channels? As you place orders through ECAT/Procurement for software, could it search the current inventory, suggest alternatives? -- -- - Automatically check on/report on purchased software via G/L, feed into process (i.e. add to inventory as soon as one person buys a copy, and start tracking meta data on it for others - Getting rid of software based on metrics; no one's using Foo anymore, let's get rid of it - Better usage metrics of existing software -- -- Packages we care about LabView - transition to new licensing model might be painful - cost not currently evenly shared by departments - different costs for student use, research use - what is LabView? Track feature lists of software as part of inventory to help people find software they need EndNote - Libraries currently doing a lot of the leg work - Heavily used at MIT - Cost keeps going down ChemDraw - Libraries currently doing a lot of the leg work - May already have site license for all of MIT, but support, paying for it not evenly distributed; a few departments are picking up the slack for the rest of MIT Adobe Suite - Photoshop - Captivate Camtasia Sidebar: Why is central SW important? - Saving MIT money - Saving people time Secure Exam Taking Software (Sloan looking at it) Not really software but hosted app: plagarism checking software Look at software lists from other universities in MIT's league; what are they providing? Where do web services we subscribe to fit in? Can we use the same process for web services/hosted apps? Sidebar: Should do some research across MIT for software; perhaps a survey tool? Find out what people are using. Web conference software (Sloan) - Polycom - Tandberg (AMPS has list) Sidebar: Articulate available vendor support as part of process. Innovaticus, just announced as "personal grid software to move files between devices. ==