Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Domains

Domain: ososs.nl

Stories and comments across the archive that link to ososs.nl.

Comments · 8

  1. Travel the official Software Acquisition Path by mverwijs · · Score: 2, Insightful · on Bringing OSS Into a Closed Source Organization?

    In my experience, your best bet in these cases is to walk the company's official path for software acquisition.

    If no such path exists, your first step is to convince management to create it. Your common goal is to get the best sollutions for the problems at hand.

    Here is a very usefull link of the dutch government on making FLOSS a viable option for software acquisition:

      --> http://www.ososs.nl/files/acquisition_of_open-source_software_-_text.pdf

  2. Re:The Netherlands and FOSS by Elektroschock · · Score: 4, Interesting · on EU Calls For Use of Open Standards

    Actually this doesn't matter at all as the ministries as users are irrelevant.
    http://www.ososs.nl/noiv/en

    The Netherlands will create a governmental lobby platform.

    It is all about the domino effect, Microsoft is very afraid of it. The critical mass to get a massive shift. Microsoft will combat it and further worsen its position.

  3. Re:hurrah! by Elektroschock · · Score: 4, Interesting · on ISO Puts OOXML On Hold

    As Microsoft finally announced to switch to ODF and refuses to implement the unpublished OOXML format before adding full ODF support there is really no reason to go on with ISO OOXML. Governments should simply mandate ODF as the XML based document standard format in their own administration. The Netherlands are a perfect example. More governments will follow. Microsoft can just embrace the domino effect. Ironically it was the ISO OOXML process that made ODF adoption happen.

  4. Re:Interesting. by Elektroschock · · Score: 5, Informative · on EU Calls For Use of Open Standards
    Or given Microsoft's continual appeals and non-payment, are there any other penalties they can exact, such as suspending the business license for Microsoft's European branch?

    Say: It was a real blow with a diplomatic Commissioner who did not mention the elephant in the room. The European political class is pissed by Microsoft's lobbying against open standards and interoperability, its software patents agitation, the OOXML debacle and its disobedient treatment of the Commission. Microsoft has public affairs problems in different parts of the Commission. Lobbying for Microsoft is generally perceived as working for Tobacco lobby groups.

    a) Nelly indirectly endorsed the OFE Open Parliament petition and the Hague Declaration.

    b) Nelly spoke of proprietary vs. non-proprietary standards, a terminology not used by the Commission before.

    c) Nelly recommended Munich and the Netherlands as best practice.

    There is much to learn from other public bodies such as Munich - and I am delighted to have the Mayor of Munich here this morning to tell us about his experience. But Munich is not alone: there is also the German Foreign Ministry [switched to Linux and open standards], and the French Gendarmerie. The Dutch Government and Parliament are also moving towards open standards. d) Munich's Mayor Christian Ude took the floor and explicitely condemned OOXML after her speech and spoke of the 'free software' used in his municipality. Original reason: no extended support for Win NT 4

    e) Ditmar Harhoff, an economist, called for patent reform. Europe would be well advised not to follow the US

    g) Graham Tailor from Open Forum put emphasis on the Freedom to Leave.

    From the speech of the Commissioner:

    The Commission must do its part. It must not rely on one vendor, it must not accept closed standards, and it must refuse to become locked into a particular technology â" jeopardizing maintenance of full control over the information in its possession.

    This view is born from a hard headed understanding of how markets work â" it is not a call for revolution, but for an intelligent and achievable evolution.

    But there is more to this than ensuring our commercial decisions are taken in full knowledge of their long term effects. There is a democratic issue as well.

    When open alternatives are available, no citizen or company should be forced or encouraged to use a particular company's technology to access government information.

    No citizen or company should be forced or encouraged to choose a closed technology over an open one, through a government having made that choice first.

    These democratic principles are important. And an argument is particularly compelling when it is supported both by democratic principles and by sound economics.

    I know a smart business decision when I see one - choosing open standards is a very smart business decision indeed. and:

    Non-proprietary standards avoid the need for licence agreements and royalties. They avoid the need to ask permission if you want to use or develop the technology â" follow-on innovation may be easier. They avoid subjecting the future development of the standard and the technology to the commercial interests of the technology's originator.
  5. Get the facts ;) by CDR-80 · · Score: 5, Insightful · on Dutch Government Adopts Open Source Software Initiative

    Hi All,
    I attended the conference of ososs.nl (http://www.ososs.nl/, mainly Dutch), which was held the day after the documents passed Dutch parlement. Ososs was set up by the Dutch government and they are co-writes of the document of the Netherlands Economic Affairs Ministry

    To get the facts ;), this is what it boils down to:
    1) Any govenmental agency must by default use solutions and products that use open standards. Only with a very good reason one can choose a closed standards product. If currently a closed standards solution is used, replacing it should be done with an open standards version ("ist" to "soll" situation).
    2) Open-Source products must be considered in any aquisition of new products. It must be weighted on equal terms with closed-source products.
    3) All things being equal, open-source is the preferred choice.
    4) Interoperability, govenmental transparancy and innovation are at least as important as the price of the solution.
    4) There is a deadline of April 2008 to implement the use of Open Document Format for all external communications within all branches of the govenment
    5) All semi-govenmental agencies have until 2011 to implement ODF
    6) The parlement explicitly stated that education must be included in this initiative. Not only for their internal ICT, but as an integral part of education of pupils and students in ICT.
    7) The parlement will keep watching progress being made.

    I personally feel that the most intresting point is not just the points above, but the fact that the govenment is using a top-down approach, which has full support of both the Home office as well as the Economic Affairs Ministry. I feel this is a landslide victory for open standards and open source in the Netherlands.
    Futhermore, I'd like to add that all parties in the parlement, left to right, were in favour of this act; this has not happened in a very long time...

  6. This problem has already been solved.. by cheros · · Score: 2, Informative · on Absentee Ballots by Email?

    The Dutch Government sponsored the development of an Open Source, GPL-ed solution that is probably more appropriate and less costly in manpower than the proposed matter (not to mention the human chain of trust that has to be established). Allow me to refer you to the paper and an article in The Register, although the paper is in Dutch.

    You can also have a look at the code . The Dutch text surrounding the link to the ZIP file is mainly explaining the ZIP file and showing an MD5 checksum for the archive.

    In conclusion, there is verified code out there for expat/remote voting, open and accessible. I would start asking questions if anything less was used. Consider the amount of people you need to trust to make this system democratically sound, and the privacy you need to give up. Conspiracy theorists would at this point strongly suspect alterior motives, and in this case I'd actually agree with them..

  7. Back to the technology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative · on ACM Eyes Policy Position on Electronic Voting

    For those excited about electronic voting (positive or otherwise), or those excited about the prospect of looking for bugs in JSP java code... used in an actual voting proces!

    Have a look at the source (Dutch site, code under "klik hier", english code/javadoc) of the voting platform used in the Netherlands for internet voting by out of country nationals during the last european elections. Its GPL, share and enjoy.

    Nothing says "internet voting != secure" as a piece of proof of concept code that could have put for cowboyneal in the european pairlment ;-)

  8. Similar Dutch initiative by ReinoutS · · Score: 1 · on Nordic Countries to Promote Open Source

    The Dutch government has started a similar initiative some time ago, providing governmental agencies and other interested parties with information about Open Source and Open Standards. The site: OSOSS.nl