The Cole Digest, June 21, 1995

Gentle Reader,

We've gave up this space to Chris Feola, the newsroom systems guru at the WATERBURY (Conn.) REPUBLICAN-AMERICAN, last week for a treatice on open systems. The reason to discuss such matters is that NEXPO '95 -- the Newspaper Association of America's annual exposition and conference -- will start on Saturday in Atlanta.

Last week, Feola gave us the grounding on open systems; this week, he talks with some experts on the matter:

While suppliers to the newspaper industry have been jumping on the open systems bandwagon for several years, only C.E. Steuart Dewar has made his company into such a bandwagon. He believes buyers have come to learn that "an open system means control and a closed system means lack of control for the buyer."

"A company might develop a page layout program that is better than Quark XPress for handling newspapers," Dewar noted, "but can they continue to develop that product and compete? Ultimately Quark will win that battle, maybe not with V-3.3, maybe not with V-4, but by the time V-5 rolls around, they'll win. ..."

Having Steuart Dewar give his opinion on open systems is facile -- after all, that's the concept behind DewarView, so it's unlikely he'll say it's a stupid idea. But asking the same question in the Newsroom Computers section of CompuServe's Journalism Forum yielded a consensus that reflected Dewar's thinking.

One respondent was JForum Assistant Sysop Sue Mosher, a consultant whose company, Slipstick Systems, helps news organizations use information technology more effectively. Mosher held both editorial and technical positions in a 15-year stint with the Associated Press, where she helped to develop computer systems and software both for AP's internal use and for use by member radio and television stations and networks.

She acknowledges that sometimes she misses her first paying media job -- as a disc jockey, playing progressive rock.

"I don't believe that proprietary formats and open systems -- however you want to define them -- are incompatible," Mosher said. "A proprietary format means the proprietor isn't constrained by the rest of the industry when they want to make changes, i.e. to advance, but it does bring an obligation to remain 'open' in the sense that other systems can use it.

"This is not a moral obligation," she said, "but an obligation to the marketplace, which can vote with its feet if it likes."

Three characteristics mark openness, in Mosher's judgement. A product must be extensible, she said, so it can be modified beyond its out-of-the-box configuration; interoperable, so it works with many other applications, "or at least the ones I care most about," and able to run on a standard platform so it "does not require proprietary hardware."

"Open systems have their problems too," said Dewar. "But a competent systems integrator (and I'll agree there aren't that many of them around!) can go a long way towards solving those problems, especially as they themselves gain experience with the products.

"But the big plus is control and flexibility. These are not easy concepts to grasp because they involve preparing for the future, whilst most system buyers are still trying to address problems of the past ('OK, with your new system, how many keystrokes does it take to lay out a story....')."

In the end, the question of open support for a system is more important than the theoretical openness of its components.

Getting to use your choice of word processors, pagination software and databases is more important than gaining access to the source code of your operating system.

And the ability to purchase keyboards, monitors, disk drives, memory and terminals on the open market is more important than having a copy of the microcode that runs your processor.

Thanks Chris.

Onward.

\dmc

[THE COLE DIGEST is written by consultant David M. Cole, editor and publisher of the industry newsletter THE COLE PAPERS. The DIGEST is made available to PressLink subscribers every Wednesday at no extra charge. Send comments by e-mail to cole@plink.geis.com. The COLE DIGEST is the property of The Cole Group, a California sole proprietorship. Reproduction in whole or in part without the written permission of The Cole Group is prohibited. Copyright (C) 1995, The Cole Group. Opinions expressed are those of The Cole Group, unless otherwise noted.

[THE COLE PAPERS is a monthly newsletter devoting itself to technology, journalism and publishing. Subscriptions are $117 for 12 issues ($135 outside the U.S.). MasterCard, Visa and American Express cards are accepted. For more information, e-mail COLE, call (415) 673-2424, fax (415) 673-2449 or write The Cole Group, 2590 Greenwich St., Ste. 9, San Francisco USA 94123-3333.]