Slashdot Mirror
Campaign for Free Software in the Bundestag
mpawlo writes: "According to Swedish IDG.se, the president of Microsoft Germany is outraged over the Bundestux campaign. The campaign aims to put Linux in the Bundestag (German Parliament). He has sent a letter to the campaign workers - some of them members of the German parliament - stating that Microsoft is not a threat to democratic values (as argued by the campaign). Kurt Sibold also states that the only thing achieved through the campaign is a public slander of Microsoft." Also reported by the Register, if you prefer English.
He is loosing the war on software. As the years go.
I think apple should port Mac OS X to x86. That would be cool.
I hope the swedish gov. will do the same.
Eventualy , move away from MS. Unless they
prove themself beeing better but I doubt they
will change into a more useroriented
businessmodel. They are used to the money.
But one day it will be gone.
- To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion -
should be using open source software. Yeah Germany. Apart from the fact that open source software IS of good enough quality now to be practicle to use and deploy it would save the tax payer MILLIONS of (£$E) every year, create a host of jobs AND improve the very software that was being deployed.
;)
Time to hassle my MP
Choosing software JUST because it's open sourced is just as bad as choosing software just because it's closed.
The proper way to choose software is by looking at the individual problems you are trying to solve and deciding what will best fit.
and anyway, how did you THINK Microsoft was going to respond?
Of course we all know who is behind this.
Could some fluent German-speaking guy offer us a rough translation of Microsoft's answer ? Thanks
The arrogance of Microsoft is just amazing. They keep trying to make us believe that they have changed their ways, but they really haven't.
What will it take for them to get it into their heads that they are just a supplier? If I found out that one of my clients was seriously considering an alternative product, I would be there grovelling, pointing out the benefits of staying with my company, maybe try to negociate a discount. But no, Microsoft are outraged! They've been slandered!
You would have though they would have learned from the Licence 6.0 fiasco. It's nice to see that the europeans (at least France, Germany and the UK) have the guts to stand up to Microsoft and consider alternatives. Why isn't this happening in the US?
One of the guiding concepts behind all versions of all UNIX versions and dialects is choice. The mere fact that you have many different dialects is a demonstration of this. NT proponents, claim the opposite, that the different UNIX versions only lead to confusion and internal conflicts within the UNIX community. Although there is a certain amount of competition between the various UNIX vendors, competition is what makes for a better product. The applies to any market and not just operating systems. With Windows NT, there is just a single company developing it. They decide what goes into it. They decide what is good for you. If they have decided that certain functionality is not needed it won't be included in the product, no matter how many users want or need it. With UNIX, if one developer includes a certain functionality, the others must follow suite or they will lose customers. Linux takes this one step further by providing the source code for the operating system and almost all of the associated tools and programs. If a single user finds a certain functionality, missing he or she has direct access to the developer (their email address is almost always included in the source code or doc). If the developer feels that the change is significant, it will be included. If not, the user can include it themselves. In addition, there are dozens of tools to enable people to add to or change their system as they see fit. The limited functionality that the Microsoft tools provide is something that you have to pay for. In many cases almost the same price as for the operating system. This is also true for Linux. However since the operating system is free, the development tools are also free. Another aspect of this choice is the configuration of the system. Here too, how far you can configure your system is what Microsoft has decided is important. Although you have access to the "internals" of the system through the registry, it is extremely cryptic and there is the danger that one small error makes your systems unusable forcing a reinstall. With Linux, there are always multiple copies of the kernel to help you if you need to recover. You can even boot from a floppy if you need to. Linux is a lot harder to use for a beginner as much of the system is accessible only through long paths or obscure file names. However, since the system is open, you can configure the system exactly the way you want it. Tools are provided with all versions (all include compilers) that allow you to expand your system. There is less inter-operability between applications because there is no large, monolithic company like Microsoft. However, since there is no vendor for the OS, no one is worried about the OS vendor throwing in something extra. Most "normal" users do not have experience with it and the command line is very intimidating. Therefore it is difficult to provide support over the phone. However, who needs to? All you need is a modem and you can do remote administration within about 10 minutes. Learning Linux is like learning a foreign language. Once you have overcome the initial intimidation, there is a whole new power available to you. You can do something that other people (or other OSes) can't. It has been claimed that UNIX has the disadvantage of carry around a "ball and chain" since it is almost 30 years old. However, most of what Microsoft claims as being New Technology (where the name NT comes from) is just a re-hash of existing concepts that exist on UNIX and other operating systems. Linux has all the advantages in terms of reliability, functionality that comes from decades of UNIX market experience. There is also a much larger skill base for UNIX and therefore Linux. If you know UNIX, it is a short jump to any other dialect. If you know NT, that's it. Your knowledge is only useful on a single product, from a single vendor. Even the knowledge and experience with one Microsoft system (Windows 95) is of limited value with another (Windows NT). Added to that the fact that Linux provides the source code to allow you to make the changes you need. One common argument against Linux (or UNIX for that matter) is that it is fragmented, with a plethora of different variations. There are a couple of things that people do not realize. First, Microsoft is full of these variants. Windows NT, Windows 2000, Windows 9x, Windows CE. Windows ME, Windows NT Terminal Edition. All serve different needs. Although they are superficially similar calling them a single product demonstrates a lack of understanding of these products (or simply falling for Microsoft's marketing propaganda). Having separate products is nothing new and not an attack against Microsoft. It makes sense to have separate products for different tasks, just as you do not normally toast bread in the oven. You choose the right tool for the right task. However, once again, Microsoft is not honest about it. Another aspect is personal preference, which goes beyond simply liking different colors. The best example is cars. They serve the purpose of moving people from one place to another. Global positioning systems, anti-lock brakes, air bags, and even CD players are all part of the features that you look for when buying a car. Sometimes it is a matter of how easy it is to reach the dashboard controls, getting into the car, or how much headroom you have. Not every car is perfect for every situation and every task. How many couples do you know have the exact same car? Taking Microsoft's claim to this extreme, it would make sense. Each time you got into the car, there would be no need to re-adjust. The oil filter and all of the other parts would be the same, so there would no problem getting replacements. However, people are different. Situations are different. Therefore, you choose the best thing in each case. In once case it can be Linux. In others, it's Sun Solaris. In another Windows NT/2000. The company I work for has all three and in use because no one has all of the features we need. If we want ease of use, we typically choose NT. However, if we need to configure the operating system beyond the basics, NT never comes into consideration. This is the beauty of Linux. You have a choice. Joseph Weizenbaum of MIT said in reference to computers: "Science has promised man power...But, as so often happens when people are seduced by promises of power, the price is servitude and impotence. Power is nothing if it is not the power to choose." Linux is choice - Linux is power.
Is it me, or is Slashdot getting behinder and behinder?
Moderators: This is funny. there is a link here if you know your languages.
Check this:
0 1/ de/index.html
http://www.securityspace.com/s_survey/data/2002
You must admit that with the present Enron debacle and with a US president corrupting the justice system. Concerns about democracy (not just some interpretation of `freedom`) are relevant.
Grtz.
I shouldn't feed the trolls, but ...
Well, Windows doesn't require any less maintenance ... except when you run it on a single desktop. But Windows Server really require a lot of maintenance (as do Sun, HP-UX, ...). Theres no real difference here ... of course you can run a windows server unmaintaned, but then it will ... well, let's say "open".
"Stuff is known to break when you hit it with other heavy stuff" Nothing new here... every non-journaled FS breaks when not unmounted correctly (besides, it never lost so much data on me, but that might have been luck).
So you don't like ReiserFS? How about XFS? Thats definitely not Beta and has been used for years in IRIX now ... (besides, reiserfs has definitely been in productive years for quite some time as well, but never mind)
Which drawbacks would that be? The one you mentioned before? No ... ext3 is journaled, so it doesn't break so badly, when not unmounted ...
I'll just skip the part that has has no whatsoever arguments. it is left as an exercise to the reader.
Governments should be using software they can trust, and trust is earned, never gained.
Windows has some good technology in it, and it is nowdays a halfway-decent product. The problem isnt windows, its Microsoft.
You just plain cant trust Microsoft, one bit. You dont evven have to ascribe to malevolence. I'm not saying they are nessesarily evil, I am saying they are unreliable. Their attitude to fixing their broken and insecure software (whatever proportion of it you think fits that description) is poor to non-existant, and getting worse. And if they arent going to take the US government seriously (DoJ) then we know they dont even care about any other government, once the licence fees have been paid up.
Anyone who considers arithmetical methods of producing random numbers is, of course, in a state of sin.-John von Neumann
most governement speak about costs. This is good because it will help Linux, but this shouldn't be the only point ! A lot of other big advantages come with open source / free software :
;-)
* stability
to avoid a crash every day
* security :
with closed source there is a lot of holes you'll never know of, and cannot correct
* future compatibility :
how to read old Word files, as it is forbidden to install an old version ?!
* openness :
A Word document cannot (or shouldn't be opened) under another OS + application than MSOffice
* and of course cost :
Linux and GNU are at the end a *lot* less expensive
But if cost drives the governement into Linux (and etc), after all the aim will be reached, even if not exactely for the best reasons
The Price of Freedom is Eternal Vigilance.
> But on the other hand, linux is not "the American way"
Which is a big plus in most countries.
Any government should communicate in open standards only. Period.
Open source software is good at doing this and Microsoft isn't. The choice is easy.
DNA is the ultimate spaghetti code.
all that remais for me is just to quote meat loaf...
'you took the words right out of my mouth...'
Kurt Sibold also states that the only thing achieved through the campaign is a public slander of Microsoft.
:)
Damn! That guy really is smatrt... wow... MS folks never cease to amase me
I guess the Germans understand "free market" better than the Americans, without a viable alternative there is no freedom of choice, if there is no alternative to choose there is no free market.
The free market needs maitainance, if it gets dominated by colluding huge companies that can kill competition (or just purchase it) then the term free market is just an advertising jingle.
It's not about Linux or Windows being better or cheaper.
The US has admitted that they spy their allies. So why using an US system ? That's a raving security problem. You never know how much backdoor-infested such a system might be. And even code audits won't help with a system with millions of lines of code. They won't never find any decent hidden backdoor.
The Linux question is about security not about money. However nobody admits this because they don't want to piss off the US.
Owner of a Mensa membership card.
From the petition:
* South Korea just ordered 120.000 open source office solutions and is looking to save up to 80% of previous costs.
* Great Britain plans the mandatory introduction of open source software in the public sector.
* The development of secure software with openly accessible source codes plays a central role within the EU commision's IT initiative "e-europe".
It seems they forgot about South Africa
When his defense asked, "Which computer has Jon Johansen trespassed upon?" the answer was: "His own."
The biggest threat to a democracy is not that the most commonly used operating system is not open source. The biggest threat is that all information on which parliaments and governments base their decisions on, is locked in a proprietary and undocumented fileformat (MS-Word).
Kurt Sibold (Microsoft Germany board chairman) responded (according to the Swedish IDG article):
"The only thing you can achieve by supporting this campaign is to publically discriminate against us by accusing our products and services of being undemocratic and an obstacle to democracy."
and
"What does a decision for or against an operating system have to do with 'democratic rules'? Open Source programs [...] are not by definition a guarantee for free competition, just like the decision to use my company's products is not or was not an 'undemocratic decision'."
Disclaimer: I don't know how accurate IDG's Swedish version is.
This is a translation of the open letter from Microsofts German Head, Kurt Siebold. I am native German, excuse the bad english, if i got things wrong, its my fault and not my intention:
Translation:
Dear Sirs,
i address you with this open letter in your function as the first signers of the werk21 ( the originators of the campaign ) campaing www.bundestux.de. With some astonishment i noticed that you share the opinion that ".. the introduction of a free operating system in the german bundestab ( the german parliament ) would be a necessary signal for reasons of competitve policy, national policy and democratic reasons."
In your declaration you claim that it is necessary to use democratic rules in the use of IT as well and you conclude that therefore ".. it would almost be the duty of a democratic country to use free software".
I conclude from that, that a country that does not use Linux must be undemocratic or at least does not fulfill its democratic duties.
Well, there may be understandable pragmatic reasons to vote for the use of open source software, though you will understand that from my point of view i have equally understandable pragmatic reasons to think that better reason exist to suggest the use of Microsoft products for the Bundestag.
But what does the decision for or against a operating system have to do with "democratic rules" or "duties of a democratic country" ?
Open source software is, as you mention, not in itself a guarantee for free competition, as well as a decision for products from my company ( Microsoft ) at this time, as well as in the past, is not and must not be a "undemocratic" decision. As the first signers you pressure members of the parliament to create real competition by making a decision for open source software as the only alternative.
What you do with your support for this campaign is a public discrimination of our products ( Microsofts) and services to be a hinderance ? to democracy. As my 1300 co-workers in germany feel with such claims, i was able to learn from numerous e-mails. The impact this has for our partners, uncounted small and medium-sized software companies and with our clients, who do not feel limited in their understanding of democracy, i can only imagine.
Therefore i apell to you: Let us, in the interest of a best solution for the staff of the parliament, return to a pragmatic discussion. I dont mean with that, that a discussion is only pragmatic if it results in a decision for microsoft products. It should though, be based on an assessment of cost and ability of the products and services in the light of the needs of the users.
yours sincerely,
Kurt Siebold, Microsoft Germany
My first real experience with LINUX came at the Uni of Stuttgart. Almost every lab/computer pool is running linux. I am sure other Unis here in Germany are doing the same. I dont want to flame but i recall the remarks of one German that a **** system like Windows would never be made in Germany, its too unstable. I can only agree with him as i see the Germans's passion for precision, stability and quality. You decide which OS come naturally to their minds.
Voltaire: God is dead.
God: Voltaire is dead!
Swedish government? Porting the Mac to x86? Huh?
s /i ndex_45450.html
8 02 42,00.html
8 09 33,00.html
2 -0 04/
First off, the first link points to a Swedish news site (instead of German newswires like Stern or Heise), but the debate is raging in Germany. Microsoft was taken off guard by this petition, and by the amount of support it has been receiving. Thus the "wounded bear" attitude in Microsoft's open letter.
Second, this is about Linux on existing computers, a market Apple definitely does NOT want to enter. Apple makes hardware, and writes its own interface above Darwin/FreeBSD. In Apple's eyes, the OS is only there to sell its own hardware, not for profit. But this isn't the place to beat THAT horse carcass.
Third, AFAICT the only one seeing this as a War is Microsoft. Microsoft is playing a Monopoly/Risk sort of game, where the winner drives all other players from the board. Apple is playing a totally different game, one where you win by being the best/coolest/owning the McGuffin. Linux advocates are sometimes playing one game, sometimes playing the other, but rarely do Linux users/advocates all play the game, or the same rules, or share the same goals.
I personally find the goal of the petition worth supporting. My personal taste runs towards Apple, but I'm willing to see the massive benefits of using existing hardware (if for no other reason than to save landfill space). And Linux is, at the moment, the best option.
Oh, some links to other reports, in German:
Stern:
http://www2.stern.de/computer-netze/news/topnew
Spiegel:
http://www.spiegel.de/netzwelt/politik/0,1518,1
http://www.spiegel.de/netzwelt/politik/0,1518,1
Heise Online:
http://www.heise.de/newsticker/data/odi-01.02.0
Is MS Windows compatible with democratic values?
Democracy means ``people power''.
Linux and open source give everyone the power to see and change the source, and distribute those changes to their fellows. Microsoft seeks, as a fundamental goal, to deny people that power.
1944: Fall of Third Reich
1989: Destruction of Berlin Wall
2002: Collapse of Proprietary Software Monopoly
-- In the beginning was the WORD, and the WORD was UNSIGNED, and the main(){} was without form and void...
A part of the project woud be developing filters for MS-office, staroffice and other office packages so everybo dy coud read write to and from the format.
But the hardest part woud be getting anyone to use it :-(
I wonder when we'll see Microsoft putting up an Anti-MS FUD page... :) Poor M$, I guess turn-about is not fair play to them..
But to be honest, if I was in a government, I'd be _very_ suspicious of M$ products with all their secret NSA keys installed. I mean it's enough everybody is being listened into by Echelon, no need to give the spooks direct access to your PC through Windows
* So Copyright trades discrimination for the appeal to invest.
* Discrimination is fundamentially opposit to the base of democracy.
Join those statements and you will conclude: Copyright is opposed to democracy.
If the Bundestag wants a democractic decission, it must favour copyleft over copyright.
(Please notice that Open Source doesn't mean Copyleft.)
The chances may be slim, and a conspiracy theory involved, but still, this is a good reason not to trust Microsoft.
echo '[q]sa[ln0=aln80~Psnlbx]16isb572CCB9AE9DB03273snlbxq' |dc
LOL yer and Outlook (Where do you want your files to go today??) is secure, so is IIS and VBA is the best programming language ever made. LOL Or better, you have NEVER managed an windows server, that's for sure. Because : well I have the misfortune of sometimes having to do it :((, when I can't pass it to the some other work mate and go back to Solaris :)
Migx
MS has done this same thing for YEARS without being retributed.
Now they are on the receiving end, they are outraged... in my opinion this is outright hypocritical behaviour... Perhaps they should learn their lesson. It is never EVER a good idea to try to look good by throwing dirt at competitors. The only way for them to go is to show they are better by creating better products and take a more modest attitude.
I believe the German for "Monkey Boy" is "Fallhammerjunge" according to Babelfish and "I love this company" translates as "Ich liebe diese Firma".
This could be useful stuff to know for the next convention of MS Gmbh...
cogito ergo sig...
If closed source software from an outside developer (ie. windows) is used by a government, surely that leaves room for said developer to hide code in there that could do damage - eg. fake votes, memos etc. you get the idea...
All we need is a decent de-compiler that inteligently looks at the machine code, figures out what it does and produces commented C.. Or, a super monk, who has learned intel machine code off by heart and can translate it. Or maybe a team of low-paid grad students.. Then we can bring Microsoft to their knees lol
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
As someone has probably already pointed out, they should chose the best tools for the job, that give the best price/performance ratio. If that happens to be Linux, good for ya. If it happens to be MS, too bad.
Additionally, claiming MS and/or closed source software is "Anti-democratic" is just as lame as MS were when they claimed the GPL was a cancer.
Slanderous, misinformed statements like these, from either side, are the last thing needed.
/W
Why should a government switch to linux? Yes you have the savings that everyone is talking about but you would have the security, ability to tailor it to a specific need. Dont forget the security also! You would believe how many American military bases were brought to an almost crippiling halt for stupid viruses. Why does the CIA use Unix? Heck even the FBI issued a warning about MS-XP's screw up!
This SIG pulled due to lack of funding. (This damn war is costing too much!)
oh god... either you are new to trolldot or used to read at high thresholds...
;-)
this is an old troll, and was used for nt too... dont be so upset
What's that old cliche`..what's good for the goose is good for the danger?
I find it interesting MS is going so far as to be saying they're being discriminated against by comments made about Microsoft.
Wasn't it fairly recently Ballmer and those of his ilk in the MS empire were saying Linux / open software was 'unamerican' and 'communist'?? They oviously don't mind criticizing when they're playing hardball or violating antitrust laws but if they're on the end of the comments, they're so offended and being discriminated against.
Speaking of anti-trust laws. Though convicted, have they yet said 'gee, guess we did it.' or so much as 'sorry'. I don't believe they yet acknowledge it, even to themselves. Guess that's why I have little use for them.
Funny how some "hot" controversies seem to slip under the carpet over time. The American NSA is *still* intercepting *my* mail; that alone should be reason for every EU government to boycott American software. Lets hear it for Bundestux, soon to be followed by Commonstux, Parlementtux, Congresotux, Oireachtux etc... :-)
The conclusion of your syllogism, I said lightly, is fallacious, being based on licensed premises
Instead of apple porting OSX to x86, it would be better for users of Linux to improve the Desktop on Linux until its as good and eventually better than OSX.
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
Einstein was dyslexic you cockganking shiteater. He was as far from beign retarded as you are from being anything other than a talking jizz stain. Fucktard!
I don't see why this would be more democratical than running Windows -- 11k is a rather small part of the german population.
IMHO it's more of an ethical question (in a twisted kind of way) that a government shouldn't be dependant on or favor one single organization over another
Going back to sleep now... wake me up when the discussion's over...
<ms eula='dmca protected content' drm='8jhdsYBwe8hd'>
<doc gen='OfficeYP' style='KndsJHNs7yu3'>
<1 alt='Heading'>JKMDShsdlkD32u9ou2ohHDJISjkds8765 8GY</1>
<2 alt='Body'>kjdshBHDSiki7sdgw3ioewrq9hIJHSi9e3bn dfweidhjhjdfksIKGHDSIJ2e9quyi</2>
</doc>
</ms>
Never underestimate the dark side of the Source
I want a variety of systems, ok, it may not be quite so easy to manage, but it means that your complete network doesn't get trashed because of one stupid vulnerability.
However, in crtical systems (either because of availability or confidentiality) then I want open source. Even there, I would like to see multiple system types though, i.e., OpenBSD as well as Linux.
Mind you, Microsoft applications and operating systmes are far from cheap. Buy them with OLP and you keep paying. Buy them as a one-off and there is a lifetime on the software before you pay for upgrades.
at least we head some protests here:
protest against microsoft by austrian comunist party
>> Open Source software," he continues, "is not per se a guarantee of free competition."
This is true, microsoft embraces and extends open source software all the time. BSD socket code and kerberos come to mind. But never anything with a GPL license.
It is so hilarious that they are claiming to be discriminated against, after all those years of Microsofts anti-competitive behavior. I bet a lot of companies complained that microsofts tactics were unfair too. And the courts agreed. Microsoft is a convicted criminal, on 7 counts that are just short of the same charges that they use to put away mob bosses for life.
Microsoft should just consider this to be an innovative method of competition. Open standards, learn them and love them.
Fully open file formats and compliance with non encumbered open standards is the future. Microsoft has already proven time and time again that proprietary software with hidden code is not secure. It is more expensive and it just isn't as flexible. Every other piece of computer equipment got 10 times cheaper and 100 times more powerful over the past 10 years, but the software is no faster now than then. And it costs more, it is now the most expensive single part of a computer system.
Of course there was a reaction to this inequitable pricing and the illegle tactics required to enforce the monopoly. Free software. The vast majority of open source software is written by highly experienced computer experts who are sick and tired of dealing with computers that look pretty but constantly crash and lose work.
Look for computer science to begin rapidly advancing with open sharing and improvements to be made with total comunications in the precise languages used to communicate our intentions to computers.
-- Never make a general statement.
I don't know how this works now in this world of preinstalled systems but it was a legal entitlement that several local people tested. Getting that refund wasn't easy though. Maybe the Bundestag will do better!
hey, i've read this _EXACT_ same story before...only cannot remember where.....
You think it will stop inside the US? "You're either with us or against us".
The owls are not what they seem
Speaking from experience, the worst security problem is the users themselves, not some back door a US agency snuck into the software you use. Some years ago, a friend of mine got himself a nice old laptop that was no longer being used over where his father worked. As soon as he got it, he took it to me so we could figure out how to turn it into a portable music making device. It turned out that nearly all of the software was still installed and that no one had bothered to wipe the hard disk before giving away the computer. Documents were easily recovered by using Undelete. Needless to say, we were amazed at this ...
the guy's dad worked for the Dutch military police!
News and bla for computer musicians: http://lomechanik.net/
> Nothing new here... every non-journaled FS breaks when not unmounted correctly
Check freebsd with softupdates. non-journaled which does not break. Exactly as the 'troll' said...
Microsoft sees the writing on the wall...Just imagine what could happen if Linux and open source are made a German government standard. France has already endorsed Linux and open source (see here). If these two major European Union countries think like this, the rest of the EU is bound to follow, both on national and European level. I guess this scares the hell out of Microsoft.
If they go through with this, they will be set back about 10 years. Germany will no longer be an economic power. Expect anarchy to ensue.
Talk about "copy and paste" from newsforge.
Don't you see? Here that's not relevant. Since this is a negative of Linux compared to another OS, it's a Bad Thing (TM) and therefore must be modded down as a troll. An old Slashdot rule..
Duh! Apple doesn't have any software products to sell! Other vendors make the software that runs on Mac. Apple doesn't get a penny.
Are you suggesting they give up the hardware business and busily start coding their own versions of Office, all the Adobe products, all the Macromedia products etc etc?
Apple makes money buy getting gullible, overly style-concious/elitist folks with too much money, to shell out on shiny appliance/fashion accessory computers.
That's the Apple business model pal. Software doesn't come into it.
Governments have given tax exemption or reduction to non-profit entities in the public interest for ever. It's their job to do that. Also, why pay money to some commercial vendor if the money could also be spent on a free software implementation that could then be used in other government agencies or even be given to other governments for free (think 3rd world countries)! There is no excuse to sink money in the deep pockets of some lobbyist if all the required functionality can be obtained from free software for the same (or less) money.
The big issue with any closed formats is that they become obsolete very fast. Goverments work slowly and they need to keep archives for a long time. For example, today we can read the documents that were created during WWII to study the history. Some documents are kept secret for 50 years, before they are released to the public.
How many Word documents from 15 years ago can you read today?
...richie - It is a good day to code.
I have to addmit, that I'm not familiar with FreeBSDs softupdates. But from what little I've heard of it, it seems to me like meta-data journaling with checkpoints of some kind ...
Microsoft deserves the back lash, since they claimed GPL is undemocratic. The attack dog they sent out just bit them in the ass. MS could have avoided this stupid line of arguments if they stayed away from phrases like "undemocratic, unamerican" in their marketing battle against open source. The worse part about this whole thing, is it may escalate much further and digress to a completely non-technical socio-political level. At that point, MS won't be able to win the argument, because it turns into movement and religion. There's nothing like fear to motivate a large group of people into action. I wouldn't be surprised if the arguments get more ugly and MS gets beaten up.
If you havent been to Germany, or If you havent worked with Germans in an IT related role. IT IS VERY different from here in the states. The mindset for one is completley different, I say that from experience, things that are the most important in the world to us mean little to them. Ive seen this first hand. Usablity many not even be anywhere on their list of issues, or something that we find indespensable, this is changing slowly, but if you bought or owned a computer in Germany say in the 80's on you know what I speak is the truth. I can actually see many of the monopolistic point we see as weakenesses, being strongpoints to those in German Parliment, the Goverment situation is VERY different from here, they live in pseudo-democratic goverment where, trade unions(they are VERY unlike here) still wield large amounts of power and freedom of speech isnt a freedom, or even an option of one. For people that dont know the situation in Germany, political, technical, or social, Pushing something on them isnt going to fly.
Sig went tro...aahemmm.....fishing........
It was like a bad movie... heads were chopped (politically), commission members recalled and advisory opinions were rewritten until the outcome favored Micrsoft as the most cost efficent solution.
The best way to support Linux here is to pay close atttention to what happens.
LoseNotLooseGuy when you need him?
-- What do you need?
-- Gnus. Lots of Gnus.
Das German Governen ist nicht fuer der corporate gefingerpoken und mittengrabben.
Der dumpkopfen whinen und complanen ist belongen in der kindergarten.
Keepen das cotten-pickenen hans in das pockets und offen der keyboard, lettum das officials makem up der own mindens, und relaxen und watchen das blinkenlichten...
http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/jargon/html/entry/blink enlights.html
---- I've fallen, and I can't get up.
Source is open, no sneaky CIA or Microsoft or script kiddies spying on formative legislation, intelligence, etc.
Saves big zorkmids on license fees (the tender spot for M$, government is a HUGE customer and can establish the trend for business and education software standards used, see all those zorkmids departing the pocketbook)
Costs some zorkmids for support and mods, but you actually get support and mods you want, rather that support and mods the closed vendor feels like providing you, creating competition in the support market (a GoodThing)
Built-in extortion of government having to "upgrade" (and shell out really big zorkmids) every few years for upgrades because M$ announces it will no longer support Windows n
Customer driven market. What the customer wants/needs isn't anticipated (and turned out in an incarnationof one-size-fits all), but tailored to the needs of the customer. If the Bundestag says "we want x that does y, in z way, then someone can step up and do it, it may take time, but of course others can benefit as it adds to open source.
As to suggestions that open source isn't good quality or pracicable (muchly as part of M$ whispering campaign against Linux, Open Source, etc.), much of that would be addressed by an expanding market.
If it succeeds, props to the Bundestag, way to show some moxie!
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Seriously, it really is an important issue if interaction with government entities requires the use of specific software available only from a single vendor, and that is what is increasingly happening. Microsoft can stay in the race by scrupulously opening up their file formats so that real interoperability with non-Microsoft applications is possible. But, so far, Office and other Microsoft applications still produce files whose format does not appear to be completely documented and that cannot be read and manipulated reliably by other applications.
... guaranteed to be readable by anyone: Plain text :). What government-to-public communication requires more than ASCII or maybe ASCII fancied up as HTML? If I'm able to read and connect to the 'net, IMO, I shouldn't require anything else to view government information.
I think if there is a substantial cost savings to be had (overall here beyond licensing and software costs) and provided that the free software is secure where it needs to be etc, that all governments should be using free software.
I'm no Open Source for Open Source's sake guy, but they are spending our money and they shouldn't be picking MS just because they're used to it or because they get free coffee mugs! I think for sure the government should be using StarOffice or something instead of MS Office (you could probably knock 1% off of everyone's taxes if you get rid of MS Office! hehe)
a lot of governments consider using OpenSource in different areas.
Microsoft fears, that once a government (especially Germany, which is a very large IT-market) "falls" to
Linux et.al., others might soon follow.
And they know that people don't return very often to Windoze. Governments even less so.
cheers,
Rainer
Windows 2000 - from the guys who brought us edlin
That's what you advise here. Your argumentation goes: There are so many people using Word for 'office type' documents, so if i want to send a document, i better use Word, cause then it's in a common format and will look the same on everyones screen (which is wrong, by the way, different versions of Word might display your document in different ways or not at all). Then you go on to say everybody should follow this reasoning, by declaring .doc the evident standard. But that means nothing will change, since noone will switch from Word to alternatives, alternative standards won't be established (lacking a userbase), and we will have to put up with Microsofts antics whenever they decide they need to sell another version of Word.
What we need is an open standard. To see why just look at the internet. TCP/IP works so well, that you don't even have to think about it. That is because everyone who implements a TCP/IP stack better plays by the rules, or he won't play at all, and his customers will turn on him if it screws up. If you tried to sell a TCP/IP stack that mangled IP-Packets from older TCP/IP stacks, to make everyone go and buy your new software, it wouldn't work, because everyone could see it's you who violates the standards. But with Word Microsoft does exactly that, because they don't even stay true to their own standards.
--
"By the way if anyone here is in advertising or marketing... kill yourself." -- Bill Hicks
Without the source how can a government be sure that the software cannot be used to spy on them
w s. nsa.02/
p pi ngPlanet_RS.html
9 8. html
e &q =_NSAKEY+Key+Microsoft+CryptoAPI&btnG=Google+Searc h&meta=
They cannot, indeed there is plently of evidence the Microsoft have already installed a backdoor in the CryptoAPI, as part of the US Government Echelon project.
NSA key to Windows: an open question
http://www.cnn.com/TECH/computing/9909/03/windo
Eavesdropping on the Planet
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Blum/Eavesdro
Microsoft collaborating with US spymasters
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/archive/65
http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&safe=activ
was like a bloody 747 (the noise of the fans matched also). To turn a machine off you had to run some programs, and flip switches in the right order; unix had a bad habit of writeback cacheing all the important sectors. Not ideal.
Everybody who has worked in a business for 2 days knows that there is no room for democracy in any company. At least not in the form of a parlamentaric democracy - the thought alone is ridiculous.
Microsoft is no execption, I guess.
Microsoft has been lobbying, spin-doctoring, strong-arming and what-not the public and politicians for year. Now, another player has entered the field - I guess they need to get used to it.
If they didn't know they had no real "friends" out there, I guess they know it now.
cheers,
Rainer
Windows 2000 - from the guys who brought us edlin
I wish that open source systems will be adopted because their inherent qualites, not because government mandate. It will be ironic, that the free source movement which aims to defend liberty has to win a upper hand with the help of government regulation?
One OS is anti-American the other is Anti-democracy. Who would've thought that OS's could evolve to that point? People are even voting for the OS of there choice depending on which moral value, license, etc. each OS represents.
:)
This gives a whole new meaning to elections. Let's just hope that politicians won't sue the OS's for unfair competition
that Microsoft is not a threat to democratic values.
I think the German parliament itself is more of a threat to democracy than Microsoft...
There is a comment from Jörg Tauss on http://www1.computerwoche.de/index.cfm?pageid=254& artid=32251&category=84
stating Sibold would go into a ideologic imputation campaign.
---
For Microsoft, being adversarial is more important than money, or even success.
Errm... let me guess.
Is it because loosers hate winners?
hmm and I tought it was so obvious ....
but these MS folks are always a box full of suprises
Migx
For the record, the Hancom office suite you are referring to is not open source. It runs on Linux, however. (And rather well on "embedded" Linuxen, as I've seen it on the Sharp Zaurus last Friday.)
Also, Hancom is WAY cheaper than Micros~1 Office.
> But from what little I've heard of it, it seems to me like meta-data journaling with checkpoints of some kind ...
Well, it orders updates to the disk structure, so there is no journal (althought it achieve the same effect as meta-data journaling). There still is an fsck, but much much faster and that always 'repair' damages (contrary to ext2fs)
Anyway, most journaling fs on linux do only meta-data journaling.
XFS can create inodes on the fly if you run out.
AFAIK, Reiser and XFS both have tremendous speed advantages over ext3 as well.
I've only installed Red Hat 7.2 a couple of times, but it suffers from the same problem as SUSE-Reiser in that it places the file system driver in a module in the initrd.
I much prefer the SGI install "shim" for Red Hat which has compiled XFS in the kernel. I like having a kernel that includes the filesystem support - putting it in a module is just a stupid idea. Any distribution should have its native file system compiled into the kernel, no questions asked.
Red Hat's big reason for not adopting a JFS earlier was the lack of userland repair utilities. I think that they really shafted both the Linux community and SGI, who has released a great and much-needed product. With Red Hat's support, XFS might be in the Linus kernels by now.
It would be interesting to see the international community flock away from U.S. software, if Congress further regulates software by requiring back-doors for so-called national security. The effect would probably be complete isolation for a big part of the U.S. software industry.
Healthcare article at Kuro5hin
I vote for bmp....
I am a government offical and webmaster. We offer forms and Texts in HTML, PDF, RTF and sometimes Winword 6.0 (yes, we deliberately chose an old format so everybody has a filter). My question to the Slashdot crowd: Waht "open" formats do you propose for governments? Is there a website/forum?
Please No ideological anti-MS rants and no formats John Q. Public can't work with yet (like XML), and nothing that costs money. I know it's a hard question....
No, this is not a correct conclusion to draw.
However, for a democratic system to work, nobody must be excluded from participating in democratic processes. Nobody must be excluded from disseminating information, based on whether or not they can afford a specific piece of software, nobody should be forced to accept a specific software license to participate in a democracy.
Microsoft has historically, is an important principle in their business model, excluded those who do not accept their license from using systems developed by Microsoft. Whether or not this acceptable at all, may be an issue for the open market, but it certainly is not acceptable in the context of democracy.
Free Software is built on other principles, and therefore, it is better suited for governmental use. Linux is just one implementation of these principles. You are free to make another implementation, and you are free to make other implementations of the same systems. This freedom is essential to fulfil democratic duties. If Microsoft is unable to ensure these freedoms, then Microsoft products must be abandoned.
Employee of Inrupt, Project Release Manager and Community Manager for Solid
I do not really hate Microsoft as a company, but I hate how they do their thing.
As an example: my Apple experience is still fresh (have this computer for just eight months), but I'm already delighted. I got the 10.0 - 10.2 upgrade for almost nothing and the Developer kit, which I used already to build some small apps with, for free.
For Windows I tried to hold off from 'upgrades', as long as possible. Only to be forced to get it anyway because otherwise some hardware device driver for my graphics card, or soundcard would not be 'certified' anymore for my old OS version. I successfully skipped ME. But I wonder what next game will force me to buy XP?
I spent roughly over $1000 on Microsoft products just to keep my system afloat and running, and be able to sample new games' demos. And apart from DirectX, there is not even added functionality that I use. (Well, even DirectX comes on the game CD included) In the heyday of the C64 and Amiga this wasn't even necessary.
You're so smart. Why don't you explain??
This point has already been raised in the debate.
As a result, MS has offered to disclose the source.
This move isn't really too unusual for MS, and the
usual (ND-) agreements would apply.
But I have to say that I doubt that the necessary
resources exist to check the code thoroughly.
I would prefer our government to use Linux.
A German Member of Parliament replied to Microsoft Germany's letter.
Original (German)
Google translation
The US is a bunch of weenies when it comes to big business.
We allow GM foods of shaky nutritional quality and proprietary GM seeds that wreak havok on regular crops by crossbreeding with them. The EU bans this stuff, the US says we don't even have a right to know if we're getting GM crops.
Trademark lawsuits between legal firms and individuals with the same name have shown that, in the US, you don't have the right to your own name.
Heck, we allow firms to manufacture torture devices for export.
Why not let M$ run amok, too?
Specifically the source was not offered to the Ministry for Security in Information Technology (Bundesamt für Sicherheit in der Informationstechnik), who specialise in this kind of stuff (security audits of software).
So MS's offer is completely useless, a mere publicity stunt.
Idempotent operation: Like MS software, wether you run it once or often, that doesn't make it any better.
uhh... Not to be (equally) nationalistic, but in slamming MS you seem to overlook the fact that UNIX was also developed in the US.
to err is human, to forgive is divine, to forget is... umm...
Varför skulle någon vilja läsa på engelska när alla vet att svenska är ett mycket mer kompetent och kraftfullt språk? ------Lamer translation------------- Why would anyone want to read it in English when everyone knows Swedish is a much more powerful and competent language? /Björn
Maybe the Germans just want an OS on they're vital computer systems that has less bugs and holes then a ghetto tenement.
RA7
---
"Consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds" - RWE
> Windows doesn't require any less maintenance
...
> Theres no real difference here
Funny, I recall maintaining Solaris boxen in Germany from my 'puter in my home in the USA's midwest (on a crappy 14.4 modem). I would be
curious to know how this would be easier with
windows?
stating that Microsoft is not a threat to democratic values
What part of public funds going to support a private industry is democratic? If a government is going to spend tax dollars on software, it should use and develop software that will directly benefit taxpayers.
I may be wrong but my perception of the original German text is more along the lines that Microsoft is not an added value to the Democratic process, thus kind of implying Democracy would be better served with an Open System.
"The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
I just read on Heise, that a study of Infora considers Windows as the better solution for the Bundestag.
According to Infora, Linux indeed has the better server abilities, and should be used for eMail servers and groupware solutions in Bundestag. But for the parliamentarians it would be much better to stay on Windows.
Seems like one of Linux's biggest problems again: It's not as good as Windows on the desktop.
Two Worlds - One Sun [Spirit]
He has sent a letter to the campaign workers - some of them members of the German parliament - stating that Microsoft is not a threat to democratic values (as argued by the campaign).
Really? Back in 1997, the representative of Microsoft in my home country, Bulgaria, had a an initiative against software "piracy" (I find this use of the word to be a particular travesty of language, hence the quotes). What they attempted to do is persuade the government to authorize law enforcement officials to search offices of private businesses and cease computer equipment which is declared by the Microsoft people to have unlicensed Microsoft software.
All this without due process of law or any of those pesky "civil liberties" that Microsoft, among others is trying so hard to eliminate. I think Microsoft is one of the greatest threats to democratic values in recent memory (possibly excluding the campaign against terrorism initiated by the hawks in the Republican administration).
Bush Lies Watch
That's not democracy, that's oligarchy.
To paraphrase Bill Hicks:
"Ooooo, who *shall* I vote for? The puppet on the left hand? Or the puppet on the right hand? ..."
.-- Trinity in high heels carrying a whip: The donimatrix - there is no spoonerism
So, really things seem to look rather good for Linux.
If you are a German citizen you might want to consider writing your MdB (=representative) it seems to work. :)
is a repetitive term. All grad students seem to be low paid (most post-docs too).
I didn't invent the work cockganking because its been used to describe what you do to your father for years.
Why a black child in a ghetto? Why not say a colored child? Or have you got a specific problem with blacks as well as dyslexics? Me bigoted? I think not, you racist, bigoted, fucktard.
Ringbarer, stop posting your hateful shite and get back to dreaming about sauron reaming out your ass with his 10" crusty dungbunker.
Yuo realy are the most increadable waste of skin I have ever seen.