Talk:Open system

This disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Disambiguation, an attempt to structure and organize all disambiguation pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, you can edit the page attached to this talk page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.DisambiguationWikipedia:WikiProject DisambiguationTemplate:WikiProject DisambiguationDisambiguation articles

Systems

	Systems science portal This disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Systems, which collaborates on articles related to systems and systems science.SystemsWikipedia:WikiProject SystemsTemplate:WikiProject SystemsSystems articles
	This disambiguation page is not associated with a particular field. Fields are listed on the template page.

Link

This topic should also include a link to the theoretical discussion of open systems for distributed computing. The seminal work for this comes from Carl Hewitt's "The Challenge of Open Systems", etc. This includes the 6 qualities of open systems:

Concurrency
Asynchrony
Decentralized Control
Inconsisten Information
Arm's Length Relationships
Continuous Operation
Financial Benifits

Currently, Wikipedia does not have a page discussing this definition of open systems nor does it have a page for Carl Hewitt.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.157.7.133 (talk • contribs) 00:10, 11 December 2004

Dab page or article?

This says it's a dab page, but it contained what appears to be a lot of unique content with no proper associated redirects. What should happen is this material be moved into pages of their own -- they may be stubby at that point, but that should be OK. The two specific sections were for computer sciences and management sciences.

The "computer sciences" part read:

In the computer sciences, An open system is a collection of interacting software, hardware, and human components
designed to satisfy stated needs

with interface specifications of its components that are
fully defined

available to the public

maintained according to group consensus

in which the implementations of the components conform to the interface specifications

The "management science" part read:

In management science, an open system (system theory) is one that is capable of self-maintenance on the basis of throughput of resources from the environment (Scott). It takes in (raw materials, capital, skilled labor) and converts them into goods and services (via machinery, human skills) that are sent back to that environment, where they are bought by customers. Contrarily a closed system is self contained, does not interact with its external environment and risks to experience entropy.

References
Scott, Richard W. (2003) Organizations. Rational, Natural, and Open Systems. New Yersey. Pearson Education.

Note that the above also erroneously links to an open system page that does not discuss management science.

Meanwhile, I've edited the dab page itself to conform to the WP:MOSDAB guidelines.--NapoliRoma 16:59, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Redux

Again, this is a disambiguation page, so it shouldn't have big swathes of unique content. The following material should be integrated into one or more of the unambiguous pages:

Open System is used in a range of contexts and the degree of openness can vary. To be fully open a system should have no barriers to entry. In the context of information and communications technologies (ICT), Open Systems are generally considered to be those where the underlying technologies are fully and openly documented and that do not require users of the system to pay royalties or license fees in order to use the system. The system is built on Open Standards. There are some debatable areas. For example, some would say a system that was dependent on a patented technology was not open even if the patent holder allowed free use and provided the necessary documentation because that patent holder might change the terms of the license at some future date once users became dependent on the technology. However, such a system is clearly more open than one that is patented with a license that requires a significant charge for using the system at the outset. Some technological systems have dual licensing so that for some groups the system is open and for others closed. One way of resolving this dilemma is to define open standards on which open systems are built as those that have been approved through the ISO process but even this can be controversial. For example the fast track of Office Open XML through the ISO system eliminates this as an option for some people. In summary, it is difficult to define open system without some ambiguity and it is often more practical to compare two systems and decide which is more open and presents the least risk of Vendor lock-in.

--NapoliRoma (talk) 15:31, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]