NHS Awards Contract to Microsoft

ChocLinux writes "Microsoft has won a £500m nine year contract to supply software to the NHS, a week after the OGC (the government procurement body) released a report describing Linux as a viable desktop alternative for the majority of government users."

Comments

Costs

[tuxter]

Only because the roll-out and retraining of hundreds of I.T. staff would have cost them millions in time and lost productivity. This is not entirely surprising, and the primary reason that Linux and open source OS's are not being adopted by the main stream large organisations. It has nothing to do with the stability,functionality and quality of the actual products.

Re:Costs

[metlin]

True.

Most people forget the overhead costs of switching to an entirely new system.

However, it's worth noting that this is more of a short-term decision than a long-term one. If they did switch to Opensource solutions now, it would cost them money in the immediate future, and loss of productivity.

However, 5 years from now, once the people are quite used to the new system - it would be a breeze. However, 5 years down the line, the same argument would be used to once again not switch to Opensource.

It's a vicious circle, and you would have to break out of it at some point of time or the other.

Re:Costs

[metlin]

But that argument will keep getting used, unless there is a gradual change that happens, as you said.

See, you would need to expose people to the new system, and unless you do, you will never make it popular.

People are used to Windows because it's popular. Why do they want Windows? Because they are used to it.

Unless other alternatives slowly start creeping in, it's going to be next to impossible.

Yes, you'd have to break the user-base at some point of time or the other, but it needs to start _somewhere_.

Not unless we all want to be using Microsoft products 10 years down the line, too. :-) Remember, 10 years down the line, it would be 19 years of being stuck to the same vendor.

Re:Costs

[Unordained]

It's funny to hear people talk about how users are accustomed to Windows and won't like to switch. Our software is Windows-based, we use linux in the server room. But our users really don't know how to use Windows -- we still wind up teaching them that yes, you can move windows around; you can minimize/maximize them; tab goes between controls; you can drag icons; no, "my documents" is not the only place on your hard drive; no, you shouldn't open any and all files, ever, by first opening Word and then going to "file", "open" ... and these are people who have been doing data-entry (on computers) for a decade or more. They don't even catch on to the basics from just sitting there using the operating system for eight hours a day. I think we, as programmers, have lost touch with what it means to get accustomed to something new. We think of it in terms of knowing where everything is in the menus, knowing how files will be laid out after a fresh install, knowing where the configuration panels are, etc. Our users ask us to come and find things in the menus for them, like, say, how to print mailing labels -- something that's in the menu, quite obvious, but they won't see because they refuse to explore. They also refuse to read labels, captions on buttons, or any text longer than three words that you throw at them -- but that's another matter. It's not that they're not capable of learning, they just don't want to. You give them OpenOffice, and they'll use it for six months, and then ask to switch back -- not because they couldn't do anything in particular or because stuff was laid out slightly differently, but just because they don't like the idea of running something other than "real" (Microsoft) Office. Sometimes, I think we should just do the "cold turkey" thing and let them deal with it. I think that's the only way they've made it as far as they have -- at some point they had to move from DOS to Windows, I'm pretty sure they didn't like that either. But they did it, and they usually don't look back by now.

Re:Costs

[Sputum]

Every time I attempt this sort of education with my users their eyes glaze over and they want me to go away. Often they'll say "Oh, I don't care about computers", to which I'll reply "They're the tools of the trade, you should know how to use them".

I know if I got a job as a carpenter I wouldn't go around saying "Oh, I don't care about circular saws". Sure, you don't need to know how to build one or fix one, but you should know how to use it.

Re:Costs

[plankers]

I totally agree with you. It's just that people follow the path of least resistance, not what might be better for them in the long term. I've been through a number of migrations of enterprise systems, from one product to another, and the users complain about everything. It isn't surprising to me that IT management wouldn't want to do anything "radical" that would cause people to complain more. Yeah, I know, and you know, that it isn't necessarily that radical, but it's the whole "sticking your neck out" thing, and that's what Linux feels like to a lot of people right now, at least on the desktop. Nobody gets fired for buying Microsoft, it seems.

Again, I agree with you, and I think that this behaviour is lame. As more work is done by corporations like Red Hat and SuSe on the desktop, as SCO dies and burns in hell, as organizations that are less "risk averse" start switching to Linux on the desktop, things will get better because the stodgy organizations won't feel like they're sticking their necks out so far.

Now, if IBM were to switch their desktops internally to Linux, and publish their results...

Re:Costs

[jeremymiles]

Let's not forget the indirect costs to the workers. People have Windoze machines at home, and they take stuff home to work on it there. They would be using different programs / interfaces at home and work. The program I work with the most (SPSS) is not available for Linux (or Macs, or anything else). (I have made attempts to switch people in my department to the open source R http://www.r-project.org/ as as alternative, but when they saw the interface, they laughed.

Re:Costs

[Decaff]

People are used to Windows because it's popular. Why do they want Windows? Because they are used to it.

I'd say its because they think they are used to it. Windows has changed almost beyond recognition in the past 10 years in terms of user interface.

I have personal experience of migrating desktops to Linux. There is often a perceived need for retraining that in practice is often way in excess of the real need. There may be some end-user irritation at the changes in interface, but I rarely find that the user is any less productive under Linux, and there huge savings resulting from cuts in support and software costs.

a week?

[Anonymous Coward]

You have any idea how long they were probably in negotiations? You think a week could make a difference? Please.

Sales cycle takes time, effort, contact

[wombatmobile]

.

Even if Linux is better/cheaper/faster...

Decisions like that one from the NHS take a lot of time and effort. The sales cycle is measured in years. Microsoft excels at this process. They have people talking to people and organizations constantly, feeding them material to show their bosses and committees.

Who is making the corresponding effort for Linux?

Re:Candy

[metlin]

As much as I'd like to disagree, it's true - MS does have the backing and expertise to do something.

UIs in Opensource are a really big problem - not because they aren't good, but because they're not _tested_ - UI testing costs money and is not as easy as most people would think.

Most end users are not CLI geeks, and for them usability plays a _VERY_ important role. Which is why, I strongly support the development of an Opensource usability team.

If there are usability geeks around here, maybe we could all pitch in and do something. What do you folks say?

Great deal for the department

[Dancin_Santa]

So Bleasdale, open source advocate in UK, gets it absolutely right. The current system is already based on MS products, and to try to replace that with Linux all at once would cost more than the half a billion pounds that the new Microsoft license costs.

However, NHS probably doesn't need all those licenses and MS has them over a barrel with regards to the number of licenses (though expanded by almost 100% in this latest contract). The great number of "cheap" licenses is a disincentive to move to other currently non-supported platforms.

The key here is that Microsoft has no hold on them to stay with Windows in the long run. Every 3 years the contract comes up for reapproval and during that time if NHS deems it worth switching some systems to Linux, then they can renegotiate for fewer MS licenses at that time. After 9 years, you'd hope that NHS has implemented a solid system framework that can handle a heterogeneous environment of Windows and Linux systems.

That said, I fail to see how choosing Linux doesn't result into 'lock in'. At least to any extent greater than with Microsoft Windows. Support for Windows can be had from any consulting agency, pretty much. Support for Windows by private consulting companies is far greater in numbers than support for Linux. Linux of course is not tied to a single vendor, but then again it isn't really that big a deal whether the money goes to Redhat or Microsoft, is it?

The fact is that they will need service on the systems whether they be Windows or Linux. In the short term, Linux is more painful because of the upfront application porting costs involved in switching, but in the long term Linux is still more expensive because of the higher cost support fees demanded by non-Windows consultants.

This contract is a win/win for all involved. NHS gets the systems it needs, Microsoft gets a boatload of money, and Linux advocates are not barred from introducing Linux systems into the NHS systems.

Re:Great deal for the department

[Noksagt]

I agree with nearly every thing you say.

but in the long term Linux is still more expensive because of the higher cost support fees demanded by non-Windows consultants.

I'd like to disregard the assumption about the proportion of costs eaten up by independent consultants vs. sales & support through contracts (which can essentially be part of that sales figure). Instead, I'd say that this shouldn't always be the case.

In the long-long term, Linux support costs should decrease. Simple supply-vs-demand. There are more shops learning to support Linux (increased supply) & this competition decreases the cost. Organizations who see this will hopefully switch, creating more demand for consulting, which will also encourage others to go into Linux consultanting.

Re:Great deal for the department

[Anonymous Coward]

Would you rather they have tried to migrate with all the possible risks involved so that when the old licenses expired and a halfway-finished Linux-based system gets booted for the first time on that expiration date and the health care system comes grinding to a halt until some brainiac decides to turn the Windows machines back on to bring the system back online until Microsoft comes swooping in with its lawyers to sue the NHS for illegal use of Microsoft software and rack up a bill much larger than this one?

Or would you rather they got the deeply discounted deal they got here with almost double the number of licenses and the health care software system keeps running and in turn the health care system keeps running.

No one is saying that there shouldn't be a migration at some point away from costly licensed software (except perhaps Microsoft). The current situation demands that Windows licenses be purchased at this point in time, and the NHS got a plum deal according to the article.

Re:Great deal for the department

[Realistic_Dragon]

That said, I fail to see how choosing Linux doesn't result into 'lock in'.

He who has his data in an obscure format gets fucked in the ass with a big stick at migration time.

The wise man, with his data in XML files you can read in a text editor, goes merrily on his way shouting 'fuck you and the £500m bill you just sent me' to his vendor.

So?

[anicklin]

The contract was probably written and approved long before the study was made available... So why try and stir up yet another controversy with such a starkly contrasting headline?

From personal experience, government contracts like that can often take years to design and bid.

Okay

[TWX]

Well, I'm not terribly surprised that a contract would be awarded to Microsoft, especially if they are the current provider, but nine years!? That's more than a bit extreme. Three would have made sense, as that's the average lifespan of a Microsoft OS before Microsoft starts reducing support when the new release comes out.

A lot can happen in nine years. Nine years ago we we had just been formally introduced to Windows 95. Most of our programs were sixteen bit and didn't support long filenames. The average hard disk drive size was something like 400MB. Most new computers had eight, maybe sixteen megabytes of memory. 14400 bps modems were the shit, and vampire-tap thicknet and token ring were the most common network types. Hell, arcnet and Banyan Vines were still viable.

The biggest thing is that Microsoft wasn't the absolutely overwhelming player that it is today. Many of the big box stores that carried computers had just as many Apple Performas and Quadras as all of the PCs of different brands combined on display. OS/2 could be found on a few machines set up as customer displays displays. Microsoft was not the overwhelming monopoly that it subsequently worked to become. With the headway that non-Microsoft platforms have been making (along with the convergent evolution of Apple's OS along with the other POSIX-alike OSes), nine years from now Microsoft might not be the juggernaut that they are today.

Already Microsoft is suffering from the rot that any middle-aged empire goes through, just look at the constant, gaping holes in IE, IIS, and Windows that leave users burned by automated attacks time and again. Eventually the right people will become pissed off and the rate of corporate adoption of non-MS software will increase further than it already has.

Nine years is just way too long.

Re:Okay

[SenseiLeNoir]

I am a Linux and MS user, so I will bite...

I think security really does in effect boil down to the user / sysadmin. A good knowledgable user/sysadmin is far less likely to be compromised that a person who doesnt hold the qualifications. It doesnt matter whether the underlying system is Linux or Windows.

I THINK the Granparent poster is tryign to say that out of the most, a RECENT copy of Apache installed in its default settings MAY be more secure than a RECENT copy of IIS, also installed with the default settings.

However, default settings ARE insecure, and ANY sysadmin worth his/her salt, would need to apply patches, and tailor the settings to suit the security model.

I myself have used both Linux and Windows for many years. I have not had a compromise on EITHER OS, ever. I have NEVER had a virus, despite not running anti-virus software. Never had any privacy attacks (spyware, malware etc), and have chosen sensible. Althgouh my firneds get attacked every day on their windows boxen, NEITHER my Linux or WIndows boxes have gotten attacked, nor have I had ANY issues whatsoever, in regards to stability (Never had a blue screen of death or Kernal panic in over a year)

The point I am trying to make, before being flamed to peices is, a computer is only as secure as the admin. and to properly compare the security models of Linux and Windows, you would need two similarly configured boxes, with DECENT admins on both.

Re:Candy

[Dcnjoe60]

For any system as large as this is, it seems that they would be running a thin-client (whether java or .net). As such, the UI is going to be browser based and the design of such interface has nothing to do with Open Source development. If, for instance, they used java on the back end (I know it's not open source) with websphere (neither is that), or even if they used jboss, the technology for building the interfaces is very well documented and tested.

Windows didn't win contracts its first 10 years

[Saint Stephen]

Windows 1.0 came out in I think 1984, Windows 3.0 came out in 1989. How many large-scale industrial contracts did Windows win then? Zero. How did Windows get to this point? It started with replacing departmental level servers and workgroups, and proved itself there for ten years or so.

So, Linux should do the same. Can't expect to be birthed ready to run a marathon.

Not the right time or situation

[Omniscientist]

This isn't the right situation to even think about implementing open source software. The system is already running on MS software, and it would be financial suicide to switch the whole thing over to an entire new system, due to labor costs, retraining, etc. As much as I dislike microsoft, if I was making the decision here and I already had a big system based off MS's products, I'd choose to stay with MS.

It's just a recommendation

[TimmyDee]

"The OGC (the government procurement body) released a report describing Linux as a viable desktop alternative for the majority of government users."

Unfortunately, the report sounds like a recommendation. Just because you recommend Linux to someone doesn't mean they will use it. Especially if that someone is a large government body that has the speed of a banana slug.

Re:Stop saying Linux is ready

[Coryoth]

Modded troll in minutes. Record time. Congratulations to those who choose to cover their ears and chant "la la la la la".

In part because it was largely an anecdote that ran counter to a lot of peoples experiences of modern distros. I could tell you horror stories I had with trying to install Windows on a machine and failing to get it to boot properly for hours trying all manner of things - the problem eventually solved by booting the damn thing with GRUB instead of the windows bootloader. That doesn't mean Windows sucks nor that it isn't ready for the desktop, it just means I had a sucky experience.

If you could actually cite some clear specific reasons (as opposed to vague "everything is unstable/broken/hard" or anecdotes of something not working right for you that usually works fine for everyone else) people might actually listen. You could try making arguments about the ease of 3rd party software installation, or the current infancy of the efforts to provide compatability between KDE and GNOME apps, or the lack of certain significant applications for various major fields (accounting, CAD, whatever), or the lack of Linux support from hardware manufacturers. Then again, all of those issues are undergoing steady improvement, or could change rapidly if there was any significant uptake of Desktop Linux, so maybe they don't let you rant quite the way you want...

Jedidiah

a 330m saving?

[Anonymous Coward]

It seems to me that all the contracts Microsoft offers with great savings, such as this one, to anyone who says they will *seriously* consider using somehing else, totally undermines their argument that their TCO is comparable to anything else.

Doesn't suprise me a bit

[SmallFurryCreature]

England is a nation living of its past reputation. To be fair I am dutch and we are living with our head in the sand hoping troubles will go away and that things like political assination, massive corruption, racial tensions happen elsewhere. But back to england.

England changed massivly during the second world war. Although food supplies became for more limited because they were now rationed out the fast majority of people actually got a better diet. It also saw the start of the National Health Service. The idea that everyone should have access to the same kind of good medical care without having to pay huge bills. To the americans, this is not such a bad idea because healthy workers can worker harder and longer.

However a NHS is also expensive. Of course the long, intelligent and complex view is that like a public transport system or social services they kinda pay for themselves. While they do not make a profit it is because they reduce the cost of others. A NHS makes sure people are sick less often and don't die so early so they can pay taxes as workers for longer. This is simple. Every kid costs the state money. The same amount wether this kid is a tax payer for 20 years or 40 years. Public transport takes people of the roads. For all those car drivers cursing about money spend on trains while you are stuck in traffic. Just imagine how long the jam would be if the people in the train were on the road with you.

However certain types of goverment seek election by promising to lower taxes. This works on the simple minded voter. You can't of course lower taxes without spending less and the NHS or public transport are easy targets. Invest a little bit later. Freeze salaries. What will it hurt for 1 term of office eh?

England now has an NHS wich is a shadow of its former self. "Efficiency" programs have the amount of managers running out of control while the NHS is bleeding developing nations of its nurses while british nurses are going stateside (language is a problem but the pay is better). Health care has gone down the crapper again with it costing more and more for those who are least capable of paying for it.

Funny thing is that all those cuts on the NHS happened to lower taxes. I wish I could have everyone who voted for lower taxes and who ended up with a higher monthly burden flogged in public for being to stupid to live. Get a clue, it don't matter what you taxation is. What matters is the monthly bill. Simple example. $100 tax bill + $0 medical bill vs $50 tax bill $100 medical bill. Doesn't tax an economic genius to figure out wich is cheaper eh?

Anyway Blair is a MS fanboy and the NHS is famous for making the totally wrong decission. Buying MS at huge costs because it is cheaper seems business as usual.

Re:Candy

[Goth Biker Babe]

I've always hated "OK" and "Cancel" because sometime s it's really not clear the right button to press actually is. I've always felt that in such cases you should have a definitive statement such as "Formatting this disk will erase all of the data!" with "Format" "Cancel" as the options.

Re:Candy

[Sputum]

Did you see the CBS election coverage? They had a guy in the "Data Room" with this awesome touch-screen interface. He could navigate it really quickly too, and it looked natural.

I've been asked a few questions about voice-recognition too.

People have latched onto the whole 9-key typing of SMSs pretty well. But you're right, people only want to learn things once.

If you have the choice between a normal bike or one that will take a little while to get used to, which one you gonna choose?

On the other hand, if the other one has a motor, people will see the benefit and make the effort to switch.

There's a sort of friction thing going on. Once you overcome static friction the resistive force isn't so much...

HCI consultancy not the issue

[tod_miller]

Not a qt/gtk developer myself:

I think the issue is not to centralise some 'uability priesthood' that would oversee design decisions in an open source project, but to educate and motivate developers... I think this is happening to a degree.

There are many resources out there, such as apple, kde and gnome usability and style guides, but the whole issue of usability is so tightly bound into overall program design that a centralised group would do nothing.

A site that brought together all development resources for usability and allowed people to sign up as usability testers (d/l app, run, do tasks, report) and also sign up and usability report interpretters (convert the information into a concise usable format - like a bugzilla report) would be more usable, accessible and accepted by the majority of OSS devs in the world today.

The last thing you want is some guy saying : "You didn't want to do that, no, you wanted to do this!" :-)

Now, I said I am not a qt/gtk/??? developer, but I feel that the libraries should be assessed to see if they allow for usability and ACCESSIBILITY at an easy level [IE, high contrast interfaces easy to develop and skin... I think this is the case right now.. again IANAQT/GTKD.]

ASIDE from that, the $40m of research for a blah blah custom interface?

That could mean anything! Like, lets blow $40m on some interns to boost our university image, and then get them to hack a VB program in a cold room while we ignore them, and then give the obligatory tatty report to the guy who gets paid enough not to read it...

This seems like a pretty sweet deal...

[barfy]

Essentially it seems like that they are getting operating systems, office products, servers/server software for about 60 pounds per machine per year, which I presume includes some level of support and 40 million of custom software.

Open Source if not quite ready for prime time, is already showing its power in competetive situations..

Re:Candy

[Combuchan]

UIs in Opensource seem to be a problem for those who are new to opensource software. While I applaud opensource programmer's efforts in creating easier software which invites more users, I can't help but feel that "tainting the userbase" can come with serious unintended consequences. As you move towards user friendly software, you run the risk of alienating users who like user spiteful software.

When Microsoft introduced "task oriented" design (such as with folders and control panel applets), they didn't forget about the old users, leaving the option to revert to "classic" views. For the most part, my Windows XP desktop at work looks like Windows 95, and I like it like that.

Gnome, on the other hand, strived so much for usable software that they alienated their userbase, and thus we have GoneME--indeed, their Project Goals are admirable.

So much is focused on making opensource pass the Mom test, but I'm afraid of it failing the experienced users test in the process.

--sean

Re:Thank fsck for that

[pandrijeczko]

Erm, why would a doctor or a nurse spend time fixing a PC that is provided as part of their job and no doubt supported by the NHS's internal IT department?

Re:Stop saying Linux is ready

[jimicus]

You really expect garden variety end users to dump Windows, and learn to troubleshoot at the low level? Come on! Get a clue. So much for Linux as a desktop replacement. What a goddamn joke.

Garden variety end users don't administer, troubleshoot and configure their own boxes. They don't install Windows. They don't even know there is a low level.

Re:Candy

[djupedal]

I'm defending the logic, not the concept. The concept is poor, but the logic is accurate, which brings me to a point that should have been made earlier, which has to do with various OSs and how they deal with errors as a rule.

Computers should always offer a way out as an option, and not just present a deadend, which is one difference between Windows and Mac OS... I use Mac OS because the concept of alerts (among many other things) reflects respect for the user, and the logic is carefully applied. Windows has never demonstrated anything but contempt for the user, which is usually at the root of comments such as yours.

Apple's 'Human Interface Guidelines' are a good way to find out just how an interactive machine such as a computer should operate - it's worth the average user's time to browse thru them, if for nothing else than to see clear examples of how software and hardware should behave. Engineers in many fields can also benefit by revisiting the basics.

Re:Tell That To The Underpaid Doctors & Nurses

[hoofie]

>>GPs and other health workers that are leaving the NHS in their droves for the private health sector.

Where's your research for this statement? My wife is a Surgical Matron at a hospital with responsbility for four wards and a lot of staff. She hasn't lost ONE member of staff to the private sector.

The private sector is not everything is cracked up to be for medical professionals. The management is often poor, and professional development may be limited for Nursing Staff [not much point in specialising in A&E in a Private Hospital - there isnt any]. Consultants are invariably employed by the NHS and top-up their income with private work. Their is no way their is enough private work in the UK to pay the salaries of all the consultants.

My wife only got her own desktop pc in the last year. For the last 5 years before that she has had to ALL of her paperwork on our pc at home or else beg or borrow access to someone else's at work - and she STILL spent three hours on paperwork at home last night.

The NHS IT infrastructure has been neglected on a national level for years - at last something is [hopefully] being done to correct that failing.

Longevity

[wombatmobile]

while microsoft discontinues support for old systems, they go to extraordinary lengths... ... read raymond chen's blog...

Joel Spolsky wrote in his now famous article about two opposing camps at Microsoft, one of which he calls the "Raymond Chen Camp" and the other, the "MSDN Camp".

Flip. Flop. The strategic direction is the result of a tension amongst younger people that is arbitrated by a few central older characters.

Linux, seems to be organized along different lines. The unpaid authors are motivated by other interests and by different values. Linux may be akin to a spiritual journey for some authors. Such a force may result in a coherency over time that stems from a belief system rather than from a marketplace.

But that's just about the author geeks who create Linux. The marketing people may be on yet different journeys still.

IBM's doing well and plays a part in Linux community.

Meanwhile, the community exhibits a lot of diversity and that's both a sign of flexibility and a source of strength.