Slashdot Mirror
North American Gov't Offices that Won't Move to Linux?
eugene ts wong asks: "There have been a quite a few stories lately of governments cutting budgets and seriously examining the use of Linux in their offices. I'm getting the strong impression that the majority of government desktops will become Linux desktops. Is this true? As of right now, how many US state governments and Canadian provincial governments -do not- use Linux for their work stations? As of right now, how many -do not- intend on installing Linux? I think that knowing this is important so that we can direct our attention to the appropriate governments, in hopes of helping them to make the correct choice."
North American Gov't Offices that Won't Move to Linux?
Posted by Cliff on Tuesday March 11, @01:50PM
from the not-down-with-da-penguin dept.
I got the impression that "down with da penguin!" is exactly what this article implies...
"Your superior intellect is no match for our puny weapons!"
Classic Slashdot... good times, good times.
Linux is never ever EVER the correct choice for 100% of the people 100% of the time. Neither is any other OS / chip / RAM type / network protocol / pizza topping / illegal drug.
I REALLY hope you meant to say "in hopes of helping them to make the correct choice about Linux and whether or not its a good fit for them."
The correct choice? Correct choice for who? You or them? Why is Linux always the correct choice? I'm sure some government agencies would be perfectly well served using the systems they already have in place. I think they can also be trusted to decide what's "correct" for them.
"Moderate drinking can help prevent amputated limbs" -- Abigail Zuger, NYTimes, 12/31/02
I'm writing this from a Linux workstation owned by the Commonwealth of Virginia (Virginia Tech actually), but sometimes Linux is not the best choice. Any shop (government or otherwise) should not be told that they have to pick Linux to help them "make the correct choice."
/.
There are other OSs out there that are not Linux that are the best choice.
Refusal to *consider* Linux is another story, but that's not what your statment / question said you wanted to talk about. Was it? You basically say that everyone should be using Linux on the desktop.
I'd love to be able to fix MacOS X boxes all day, then I could concentrate more on
Having to explain linux all day would bad as explaining Windows all day, for some of my users, just as I have to explain Windows repeatedly to my entrenched DOS user, the BSD user who likes to run our servers from his FreeBSD Box, the geek next door that uses Solaris (came with his hardware, and is free for education if he wants to upgrade)....
I am, and always will be, an idiot. Karma: Coma (mostly effected by
Reading Slashdot, I'm under the impression that Windows XP can't run 10 minutes without crashing, Macs explode if you plug in a 3 button mouse, the DMCA forbids backing up your data, John Ashcroft will put me in jail for watching foreign films and I just got first post.
In fact, the most recent Halloween Document describes Microsoft's frustration at the inability of their PR machine to keep pace with the volume of nonsensical claims of enormous Linux deployments coming from the Open Source media. They didn't mention sites by name, but I have a good idea which Taco-riffic site and its stories about "Norway Switches to Linux!" they had in mind.
What I'm listening to now on Pandora...
Dear Slashdot,
Please tell me how to run my holy war.
Thanks!
Clueless poster
Too bad we can't mod the article (-1, Flamebait). I like Linux, but it can't do all the jobs in every situation. Besides, if someone doesn't want to use something, what makes you think you have the right to make them use it?
The question should have been asked: "What operating systems are governments considering for the desktops of the typical employee?"
Boiled down, Slashdot is not the place to be asking this question. Once you have compiled the list by asking the decision-makers, THEN you can tell Slashdot your results. THEN you can let Slashdot readers evangelise to their local governments for their favourite operating system, WHATEVER that may be.
The question that was asked is too biased to get an answer that is worth more than a fart in church.
Give me my freedom, and I'll take care of my own security, thank you.
Did you imagine it any other way?
Sorry about the writing. Robot fingers, you know? Cliff Steele in DOOM PATROL #23
There have been a quite a few stories lately of governments cutting budgets and seriously examining the use of Linux in their offices. I'm getting the strong impression that the majority of government desktops will become Linux desktops. Is this true?
There is a big difference between "examining" and "implementation".
Governments, like most large institutions, are slow to change. Changing from Windows to Linux desktops costs money. Many State and City governments in the US are in the midst of their worst budget crisis' in 20-40 years. Now is when the freeze spending, lay off workers, and cancel research. They're not just going to change willy-nilly.
I am actually talking to people who work for several cities in the San Francisco Bay Area about using Gnome or KDE for their desktops (I'm probing out of curiosity, and I want to see what's planned for 2 years down the line).
Their additude about switching desktops is usually something like "Sure, Linux could be great, but are you INSANE? We'll save $x00 tops, but it will cost nearly that much to install the new software, train everyone to use it, and then fix the bugs."
As of right now, how many US state governments and Canadian provincial governments -do not- use Linux for their work stations?
None? We occasionally see small cities switching to Linux, but I doubt that there are any State governments who use Linux Desktops on a systemwide level.
Look, I love the Linux desktop. I use Gnome almost on a daily basis, but I still need to use Windows to run MS Office so that I can send my resume to people who request MS Word format. If I send it using any other format (including OpenOffice's MS Word format), I get complaints on the other side like "The formatting is all screwey".
"Can of worms? The can is open... the worms are everywhere."
I'm getting the strong impression that the majority of government desktops will become Linux desktops. Is this true? As of right now, how many US state governments and Canadian provincial governments -do not- use Linux for their work stations?
Quick answers: No, All of them (as far as I know)
-- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
Wow, I never thought that this would be accepted by the editors. When I submitted this, I did want to know about some things, but I couldn't resist saying some trollish stuff.
:^)
For those who offered some meaningful statistics, I appreciate it. Thank you for your time.
For what it's worth, when I said, "I think that knowing this is important so that we can direct our attention to the appropriate governments, in hopes of helping them to make the correct choice.", I really did intend that to mean, "How can we make them only use Linux?". I wanted to see how well this would be received by the editors. However, in reality, I do respect the fact that governments should have the ability to choose the best software for the job. I'd happy if it were Linux or *BSD, but it's not that important to me.
I feel so evil.
testing out my trending skills
I'm sure you meant "we" as in "we the taxpayers" and "make the correct choice" as in "get the best software for our money". If that choice isn't painfully clear by now, then you're right, we should help our governments make the "correct" choice.
"I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
If you happen to be an American, congratulations! The US educational system has done a fine job with you. It's too bad you didn't study more on your own. You'll be on the front lines of the "War on Terror!" in time to invade the next country in the "Axis of Evil".
I work for a state government and although i dont' directly make decisions the people i work direclty for do and very much listen to me. I sat down and figured it out one day and I could cut literally millions from the budget over the next 5 years if we switched from Microsoft and other Expensive solutions to Gnu/Linux and other open source solutions. StarOffice (not openoffice, its got the shittiest spell checker) alone would save us a bundle.
Only major stopper i have at this point is MICROSOFT ACCESS!! There is NOTHING in linux that general office people can use to replace access, i've explorered tons and tons and tons of alternatives and nothing is even slightly close. Oh and btw i mean Access as a front end, not the actual data.
Anyone who works in an office knows that many people have a few dozen access databases that they use regularly and lets face it, spreadsheets can't cut it.
Other than Access every piece of software we use can be replaced easily.
Not only would a Gnu/Linux solution be cheaper but it would make employees more productive for many reasons.
I find it extremely hilarious those TCO reports paid for by microsoft, etc... running linux is way way way way cheaper in every aspect for the most part. And i've found that Tech Support will NOT cost much more at all.
In addition to cheaper software it will cost the State less money for the machines too since the lifetime of a computer is suddenly a bit longer (since linux can run on slower hardware better than windows).
I guess another big part of this would be avoiding the Microsoft Tax however.
However, if you are using a loser OS, well tough titty, buster.
Eat my dust.
No linux distribution (or linux itself) has passed the Common Criteria certification yet. Many government offices cannot run operating systems which have not been certified.
I believe that there are now some companies working on having some Linux distribution(s) certified, but don't quote me on that.
I work for a State agency in, ahem, the nation's largest state. If you ask me, the problem has to do with IT staffers who only have jobs due to their Microsoft certifications (aka Microsoft "engineers" if you will). Mention one word about Linux and it freaks them out. And if you think that's pathetic, even in terms of proprietary software (ie. Microsoft), they won't even certify Windows XP because they probably haven't done the refresher courses. Our IT staff is under the impression you cannot have XP machines on a Win2K network! (and thus they are still buying computers with Win2K despite the fact that the support clock from MS is already ticking on that product). They look at me funny when I state I want to install Mozilla, Phoenix, or Netscape7 as my browser and then give me a lame excuse that they haven't been certified by the department's security (as if IE is secure!). Oh yes, even better. Our department creates its webpages from Frontpage2000. Most of the webmasters want to use Dreamweaver and actually do use it, but it has to be converted for use on Frontpage at the server level... Your tax dollars being wasted more than me typing this in on the job... :0
"Right now, somewhere in this world, Scott Baio is plowing a woman he doesn't love," - Peter Griffin, *Family Guy*
The commenwealth of PA has an exclusive relationship with MS .. is that non-linux enough for you?