Slashdot Mirror
Partnership Initiatives In Companies That Support OSS?
reptyle asks: "Over Xmas dinner, a friend of the family told us she was considering
launching a partnership between her employer FNMA (colloquially known as Fannie Mae; they are a semi-private company that guarantees mortgages) and Microsoft to provide training and eventually, surplus hardware to private individuals and non-profit outfits. I lamented this choice and she suggested that I e-mail her names and URLs of companies as alternative recommendations. So far I have come up with: Debian, Red Hat (distributions), VA Linux, Penguin (hardware companies), and maybe a few non-profit advocacy groups, but I think the list is still a bit too short. I can't think of any other entities that might be appropriate so I figured I'd ask Slashdot readers for help in providing other organizations that I may have missed. I don't care whether the organization uses Linux or BSD, just as long as it's not a proprietary model."
This guy is probably one of the same people that defends Microsoft whenever they do something wrong by saying, "If you don't like what they're doing, don't buy their product!" Then when someone actually tries to avoid buying Microsoft's product (and thereby make an attempt to vote with their dollars, or in this case, recommend that a non-profit organization do so), this guy attacks that idea as well.
Sure, Linux isn't the answer to every problem, but it's up to the organization to decide. If Linux will suit their needs as well as Windows would, then it probably makes more sense to use it instead of Windows. It may even be worth making a small sacrifice or two, just to avoid having problems in the future and to help open source software to grow and mature so that it becomes a better solution over time, whereas Windows will always be quite expensive to maintain.
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
I'm not real familiar with IRS rulings; I'm more in tune with the Canadian Income Tax Act. There, the accounting for such a "gift" would have to involve:
- Declaring the donation "in kind;"
- Declaring an equal and opposite INCOME .
The net result is that no matter how much the donation was, there had to be a corresponding sale that got treated as a donation.There are still nice opportunities for "benefits" via:
- Giving away something where the costs are minimal to nothing, as with giving away last year's version of something where the boxes, docs, and media got expensed last year and where the alternative was likely to "dumpster" it;
- Getting the "goodwill" from seeming to do something nice;
- Giving away a gift that will keep giving back.
But the point is that "writing off more than the cost of making the contribution" seems unlikely to wash well unless they're actually going to lie to the tax authorities. I expect that the three "secondary benefits" are quite enough to encourage the contributions of software, mind you...As with software where the charity will have to buy a bunch of licenses two years from now, or risk SPA attacks...
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
There's a big difference between "Microsoft is suitable" and "Microsoft is the only option". The poster is just trying to open up alternative, and potentially lower-cost, options.
The only reason that Microsoft products are a "better choice" is due to network effects. People use MS Word because it can read/write other peoples' existing MS Word documents.
Training new users is a form of indoctrination. And you're not just teaching them to conform to the real world environment; you're creating that real world environment, so that the next generation will have even more reason to use Microsoft products regardless of their lack of merit. To think otherwise, is to admit that individual actions do not matter and that no one can make the world a better place. That's too fatalistic and unromantic for Slashdot. ;-)
A good place to break the destructive cycle is at the point where new users are trained.
---
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
Sun in particular, seems to want to be the Anit-Microsoft.
They would be interested in training for StarOffice, as well as their commercial offerings.
Another choice to look at would be IBM. They have been doing a lot of work with OSS of late, and might be willing to work with you.
Good luck, however, in any of your choices.
-Colin
--
This message brought to you by Colin Davis
Colin Davis
For running charities, perhaps, but for getting a job? Take a look at the SANS 2000 Salary Survey Summary:
"The average for UNIX folks was $70,080, while the average for Windows folks was $61,233."
Granted, this only applies to SysAdmins (so I probably would agree with you in general), but given the currently high demand for "UNIX folks" (and despite the fact that Linux is not technically UNIX), it seems that training people in Linux is not such a bad idea. Speaking more anecdotally: I was able to get my current job as a UNIX admin because I got so sick of working in retail that I decided to train myself with Linux (plus it was interesting, fun, and free). I know of several other people who have done similar things, and I even have friends involved in hiring that say that Microsoft certifications actually make a resume look worse (one said that he threw away a resume as soon as he saw the letters "MCSE").
I should also add that Linux is an excellent platform on which to learn programming, which opens up yet another career.
Augh...wait a minute; what am I saying? Train no one in Linux! The fewer people there are who know how to use it, the more in-demand those of who do know will be. (Now you know the real reason why people report that Linux is hard to use
With all due respect, I think non-profit groups would prefer having any equipment at all.
.. that she should wait until she can give Duck a l'Orange and Yorkshire Pudding?
They'd probably want equipment and software they are familliar with, since they probably couldn't afford support should their *BSD or *nix knowledge be close to nil, which I imagine it might be.
Isn't this a little akin to advocating a friend not to give KraftDinner and Chicken Noodle soup to a food bank
If something has never been said/seen/heard before, best stop to think about why that is.
"Old man yells at systemd"
This company is a NOT FOR PROFIT organization! why would you partner with a comapny that is going to charge you insane amounts of money for there own personal gain while your company isn't making a dime while trying to help other people.
I used to work for another NFP org. that dealt with Fannie Mae alot. They subscribed to the M$ way of life and in 1999 2 months before Y2k they still had over half of the organization on 486's with win3.1 because they couldn't afford to continue to upgrade.
That is exactly why NFP companys should be embracing linux above all else. It's going to decrease your It budgret by at least 2-300 dollars per computer. Think of the enhancment that would give to the rest of the business.
And don't reply saying there are incompatibilities. this NFP org I'm referring to used a AS400 for all banking/accounting/whatever and used the systems for nothing more that Term sessions, Word Processors and Chart. all of which can be done under linux with as much productivity as they need.
It all depends. Yes, for employment training your argument holds. But there are lots of other kinds of non-profit enterprises that need IT.
I know, I used to be IT director for a medium sized non-profit.
Commercial software creates a number of problems for underfunded non-profits. If you only have a few copies, then you have support and compatability issues with the old software.
If you get enough licenses to cover everyone, then you have to worry about depreciating the gift -- a process that has no financial benefits to the non-profit but is nonetheless required. We once got a in kind grant from Oracle that was going to, on the books, be worth 3/4 of a million. Great this year's statement, but a huge paper expense for several years following. We had to do a lot of creative accounting (and trimming of the gift) to make it work. Of course, this is all smoke and miirors, but it can affect your ability to raise funds. Snooty brahmin donors like charities that look fiscally sound (thus the rich charities get richer).
Then there's downstream upgrading costs. If I'm Microsoft and I give you a million dollars of software but don't let you upgrade free in perpetuity, I'm not being very charitable, am I? For a marginal cost of zero I guarantee a nice future annuity.
So how do you handle this with commercial software if you are a charity?
A fairly common practice in the charity sector is, I believe, to ignore licensing and EULAs and hope MS and SPA doesn't want the bad publiciity (I personally never counted on this -- there is no such thing as bad publicity for the SPA).
Free software eliminates legal risks, financial complications, and licensing hassles.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Sure, you may not like their software/business practices/leader or whatever, but for training people up to be able to use a computer for running charities or getting a job you'd be far better off teaching them how to use Windows/Word/Excel than some open source solution which is more difficult and less well supported.
It's sad to see that despite all the talk of using the right tool for the job when /bots talk about programming languages when it comes to operating systems they want to use open source wishware despite the fact that there are plenty of cases where using a Microsoft solution would be a better choice. Don't let your prejudice make these people's lives more difficult. And since Microsoft already do stuff like this, your case looks even more like open source ego stroking.
When you walk in for one of these jobs they will (hopefully) test your familiarity with the applications they use. Do you know the applications well enough to get the job done with enough efficiency to justify some multiple of minimum wage.
There is no on the job training for word processing or image manipulation etc. You'll get 10 minutes of training on their filing system and thats it.
Chris Kuivenhoven is a thief, beware
In theory, the business isn't really supposed to gain anything from the gift. They're only allowed to deduct the value of the gift. That means you can't give away a clunker automobile and take off the full price when it was new.
But determining the true value of intellectual property like software is impossible to do. All the costs lie in the creation and it costs almost nothing to give away a free copy.
So what amount does Microsoft take off its taxes when it gives away a copy of Windows to a non-profit? I don't know, but it could be larger than its real cost. I talked to a few tax lawyers in producing the book and they said there was no firm guidance from the government in the matter. It was possible that software companies were taking off the full list price for the product.
So, the point is that businesses can generate cash by giving away software to non-profits by writing off more than the cost of making the contribution. I'm not saying that Microsoft or anyone else is doing this, but I wouldn't be surprised if someone is suggesting it to them.
Unfortunately, the open source community loses in this structure. Of course, donations to Stallman's FSF seem to be tax deductable so maybe it all washes out in some strange way.