Slashdot Mirror

GNU has been around since *1983*!
Linux was released in *1991*!

By 2010 the city of Munich public services had deployed SuSE Linux in 20% of its front end systems following prior announcement of the plan in 2003, with the stated intention to complete the transition to FOSS by 2015. citation

Personally, I've been using Linux in various flavours and for various projects since 1996.

So clearly, the Head of Delivery is full of shit.

Where did that information come from? I live in Poland and I'm pretty sure FOSS isn't almost used at all on governmental boxes. I used to work for a governmental agency and never saw anything but Windows.

I've been reading about Polish govt accepting FOSS for long time now, it's easy to look it up on the web: http://www.osor.eu/news/pl-ninety-percent-op-public-administrations-use-open-source There are more sources, however, I have no "hands-on" knowledge nor I ever worked for Polish govt. to be able to deny or confirm those claims. If I mislead someone it was not intentional.

Their "Eierlegende Wollmux" also sounds useful. (translation: "including the kitchensink"??)

LinEX !
Dunno.. The Extremadureans seem to use it for agribusiness.

The spokesman adds this does not mean that ODF will be a mandatory document format for the country's public authorities. "Most if not all public authorities in our country use Microsoft Office. I have no idea if our approval of ODF will mean they will change that. Our institute has simply decided that ODF is something that can be used in Croatia."

Being a standard != being the standard.

10% of desktops running Linux 6 years after the migration started?? It's an utter failure.

First it's not been 6 years, it hasn't been more than 4 years. Yes, the migration was supposed to start in 2003, however it was put on hold. In 2004 they decided a study was needed "to clear up legal insecurities related to software patents. The actual migration has been running since 2005."

Secondly they never meant to switch over to Linux all at once. Instead they planned to switch people to FOOS applications first. Meaning switching from IE to Firefox, MS Office to OpenOffice, Outlook to Thunderbird. Once people could use those then the OS would be switched to Linux. And for those apps that are needed but can't be replaced by a FOOS app, then run it in WINE.

While only 10% of the desktops have been migrated to Linux 60% of users use OpenOffice.org instead of MS Office.

Falcon

Bearing in mind that the have migrated only 10% of desktops in 6 years

One reason the migrations has been slow is because in 2004 they decided they wanted to do a study, the "study was conducted to clear up legal insecurities related to software patents. The actual migration has been running since 2005." Still it has been a long tyme.

Falcon

The Declaration of Independence: The LiMux Project in Munich has more info on the failure. For instance one reason the migration has been delayed is because of concern about software patents, the city wanted to do a study because of legal insecurities.

Falcon

Conclusions

"There are perhaps two main lessons to be drawn from Munich's experience. The first one is that such a large-scale migration requires careful analysis and planning, as well as a clearly defined goal. It bears repeating that in Munich this goal is the strategic independence from software suppliers. Lower IT costs are a welcome side-effect, but autonomy is more important."

I see no failure. I see people thinking outside the Microsoft box. People who are interested might actually read and understand. http://www.osor.eu/case_studies/declaration-of-independence-the-limux-project-in-munich#section-12

I don't believe that anyone in the Linux world has ever suggested that migrating to Linux is completely "free", or even that it saves money in the short term. It most definitely saves tons of money in the long run. To suggest otherwise amounts to FUD.

Project started in 2003 and only 60% of the desktop have been migrated... Luckily I am not a Munich tax payer because I would seriously challenge this project justification....

From the article at http://www.osor.eu/case_studies/declaration-of-independence-the-limux-project-in-munich#section-12/

Together with SuSE/Novell and IBM, the city worked out a detailed concept for the migration during 2003 and 2004. During summer 2004, the project was put on hold while a study was conducted to clear up legal insecurities related to software patents. The actual migration has been running since 2005.

Most parts of the city's administration choose a soft migration, first installing the open source applications Thunderbird, Firefox and OpenOffice on Windows computers. The migration to OpenOffice also introduces a new system for managing templates, called Wollmux. In a second phase, the departments then roll out the GNU/Linux basic client.

Notice it was delayed by patent FUD. Software patents are not valid in the EU.

Notice also that they are implementing it in stages, using Open Source on top of Windows and only some departments installing Linux at a given time. It has a time line going to 2012 for completion. Incremental migration is pretty normal on large projects.

Here it is the whole story, maybe it might interest you.

The software cost of upgrading is often effectively nil, because most large enterprise environments are on multi-year Enterprise Agreement contracts that allow for no-additional-cost software upgrades...

Like they haven't been already burned before by that company, at least once, by similar claims.

Deciding that a specific product is inappropriate is out of their purview...

Except if that product is known bad. They have an obligation to prevent further damage and / or to prevent good money from being thrown after bad. The recession is a depression in many areas, as evidenced by among other things, deflation. Regardless of recession or depression the times are harder, and not through getting harder, than has been experience for a few generations. And with that in mind, any wasted money means lost jobs. That wasted money can come through unnecessary licensing as well as lost efficiency.

If the French Gendarmerie can reduce IT costs by 70% through use of FOSS, why isn't Texas allowed to do so as well? Or, as the original post states, why not at least be able to avoid shelling out for MS Vista upgrades and upgrade headaches?

this claim of 50 million euro saving is arrived at by the commissioner multiplying the cost of the licenses by how many they didn't have to purchase. A text book example of calculating yourself rich.

If they did have to purchase those licenses (and they would have had to, sooner or later), would they have got the budget for it? How long would they have had to wait for approval?
Now that they won't have to spend that money on licenses, what will they spend it on instead? I expect that they don't have the money in the first place (as you suggest).

he also claims NO training was needed... so no training of your system admins, or any staff?

Yes. Quote from TFA Source: "Users need no training to use a web browser". He was not talking about administrator training, it was end user training. Here is what he had to say about the savings they were making on administration tasks:

Previously, one of us would be travelling all year just to install a new version of some anti virus application on the desktops in the Gendarmerie's outposts on the islands in French Polynesia. A similar operation now is finished within two weeks and does not require travelling

Ubuntu's advantage, in particular, is that it effectively delegates many administration tasks to application and package writers. The commercial world calls this "software as a service", I think.

You are looking at netbooks. Three options are lined up:

1. Linux. Cheapest on display, looks pretty but not Windows so it makes you a lottle nervous. (From POV of lifetime Windows user)

2. Windows XP. Only a few dollars more than Linux, familiar, safe choice. That's why it is smoking the Penguin now. Of course this is only because Microsoft is basically giving it away.

3. Windows 7. Folks say it actually runs a little faster than XP! Of course you pay even more than XP but you only get to have three apps open.... unless you pay a LOT more.

So hands up if you would pick option 3. Uh huh, and that's their problem.

They are paying OEMs to put Windows XP home on netbooks. Savvy people are buying these, wiping the disk, and putting Ubuntu on them. A full, unconstrained version of Ubuntu. Exactly what Microsoft cannot compete with and doesn't even want to try.

Savvy people such as the French gendarmerie:

http://www.osor.eu/news/fr-gendarmerie-saves-millions-with-open-desktop-and-web-applications

I find it amusing to think of Microsoft subsidising the hardware of my ex-XP Home-now-Ubuntu netbook.

The really amusing thing is going to be watching Microsoft try to figure out how to get Windows 7 installed on future netbooks in place of XP Home ... and yet still make a profit.

Same price as current XP Home ... no profit.

Reasonable price for Windows 7 ... no Windows 7.

> I guess we have to pay for the "real" releases now.

http://www.osor.eu/news/fr-gendarmerie-saves-millions-with-open-desktop-and-web-applications

If you choose the right OS in the first place, you don't have to pay anything.

While I could not find really useful English links about it, the Open.Amsterdam project has been running for two years now, and last October the City Council have declared that the long-term goal is to have all of the local government on open-source desktops. The pilot used SuSE Linux for two of the city's departments. Along with the wide-scale deployments like Munich or Vienna have done, I think you will have plenty data points in a few years.

See here for a minor press release in English.

the countires adopting Linux in the first place are rthose where people cannot afford the price of retail Microsoft software [...]

You don't read much news, do you?

Bes

http://osor.eu/case_studies/declaration-of-independence-the-limux-project-in-munich

Nah, too political and the political process takes too long.

No, what you have to do is the following:

1. Shoot all Windows admins. I know, it sounds brutal but trust me, it'll be better for everyone on the long run. It's no more than what they deserve after all. I mean, they freely chose to support the Evil Empire.

2. Send all the brainwashed Windows users to the appropriate re-education camp to have them deprogrammed. Now, some might say that this is no better than what Microsoft has done all these years, and I'd agree, but sometimes you have to fight fire with fire.

3. Send in the LPTs (Linux Proselytization Teams) to spread the Word amongst all those who didn't get the message the first time around. After all, there are always some for whom the deprogramming process doesn't work perfectly, or who managed to escape the initial roundup. It's necessary to root them out so they can be given proper guidance. Really, it's for their own good.

This may be hard for some of you stomach, I understand, but just think how free we'll all feel when Microsoft is gone forever.

>3. Send in the LPTs (Linux Proselytization Teams) to spread the *OpenOffice*

Fixed that for you :-)

You have to know how to do it. Germans did it right, so they succeeded.

It isn't impossible to migrate. It costs money, but on the long run you win. The potential cost reduction is huge on the long run.

And the most important reason to migrate is very well described in this document:

http://osor.eu/case_studies/declaration-of-independence-the-limux-project-in-munich

The reason is : "the main motive is the desire for strategic independence from software suppliers."

Bes

http://osor.eu/case_studies/declaration-of-independence-the-limux-project-in-munich

Nah, too political and the political process takes too long.

No, what you have to do is the following:

1. Shoot all Windows admins. I know, it sounds brutal but trust me, it'll be better for everyone on the long run. It's no more than what they deserve after all. I mean, they freely chose to support the Evil Empire.

2. Send all the brainwashed Windows users to the appropriate re-education camp to have them deprogrammed. Now, some might say that this is no better than what Microsoft has done all these years, and I'd agree, but sometimes you have to fight fire with fire.

3. Send in the LPTs (Linux Proselytization Teams) to spread the Word amongst all those who didn't get the message the first time around. After all, there are always some for whom the deprogramming process doesn't work perfectly, or who managed to escape the initial roundup. It's necessary to root them out so they can be given proper guidance. Really, it's for their own good.

This may be hard for some of you stomach, I understand, but just think how free we'll all feel when Microsoft is gone forever.

Bes

http://osor.eu/case_studies/declaration-of-independence-the-limux-project-in-munich

FireFury03 wrote:

No, it doesn't - it provides access to people who purchased a product from one specific vendor - namely Windows from Microsoft.

And as much as Bliar appears to like to pretend that the UK is the 51st state, it is still in the EU. Here is what the European Commissioner for Competition Policy, Neelie Kroes, has to say on the topic:

Here's what the European Commission has to say:

And to top it off, here's what the UK government itself has to say about it:

In short, the BBC is indefensibly wrong to lock people into proprietary standards and systems and all the more so in regards to MS cruft, given MS legal standing in the EU.

FireFury03 wrote:

Saying "to receive BBC TV you need to have a TV receiver" is fine, but "to receive BBC TV you need to have a TV receiver manufactured by Sony" (for example) is not.

Fortunately even politicians are waking up and less and less turning a blind eye towards anything hidden under the label "computer".