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.

Comments

WHY Linux ?

[dbucher]

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 ;-)

Re:Translation ...

[Anonymous Coward]

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

Re:Every government....

[oever]

XHTML & CSS should suffice. Add to that SVG & MathML and you can send many types of documents.
The guys at w3.org have written many standards, for many types of applications.

And if that's not enough, write you own DTD and publish it.

Sorry for all the acronyms...

Tax free hardware in the Bundestag?

[Slashamatic]

I'm kind of curious that the the issues of ordering desktop PCs without paying for a Microsoft OEM Licence could be interesting. A number of vendors will still insist on you buying the system with an OS, which they will then refund you for, if returned unopened.

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!

Re:Tax free hardware in the Bundestag?

[Slashamatic]

There wqa a big fuss in Germany about the Microsoft Tax. If you had a shrink wrapped MS package with your system, you could return it with the statement that the O/S s/w had been erased and the supplier was obliged to give you your money back.

This was actually based on the M/S end-user licence that states if you do not agree, you may return the software unopened for a full-refund. At first there was a fight about it as the system vendor wanted the entire machine back. The more sensible ones realised that it was a good way to bypass the MS tax for them too.

At the same time a grey market developed in OEM s/w and licences and software. Microsoft Germany didn't like it but individuals had no restrictions about the resale of an OEM licence (I guess this is what the US people call "doctrine of first sale").

Good translation

[f00zbll]

thanks for the translation. From KS's letter, I find the whole line of thinking incredibly stupid. Software in and of itself is not democratic or undemocratic. It's software. Software isn't a soldier holding you hostage at gun point. Sure using non MS products make it harder to share text and spreadsheet files with others, but no one is going to kill you if you use something else.

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.

Re:Every government....

[uebernewby]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't OpenOffice use zipped XML as a native file format already?

Study against Bundestux

[Tomcat666]

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.