Slashdot Mirror
Dutch Gov't Doubles Back On Open-Source Goals
An anonymous reader writes "Despite a 2002 unanimous vote by the Dutch parliament to prefer open standards and open source, exclusive negotiations with Microsoft were started. MPs have started asking questions already, but will add some more now that a Dutch journalist discovered that the deal will cripple the open source ambitions. The deal not only covers desktop software, but lets Microsoft deliver server software and support as well. MPs are outraged, and the EU may investigate why no mandatory public bid was started. In an open letter to the government, public organizations and open source companies like Novell raise hell. How can you ever fight bureaucrats?"
never keeps his promises....
:)
anyhow, nothing has been done yet, so let's not be too quick on judgements...
though I wonder why they did this.... licking heels of american companies hasn't helped us the last time (Joint Strike Fighter, anyone?)
And, yes, I'm from holland
I guess we know what this means, that for some people at least all the talk about using open source and open standards was just a play to squeeze Microsoft.
And remember kids: Never trust a computer you can actually lift.
To prevent misunderstandings: this is about the continuation of agreements to which many users feel compelled to on the short term; this does not change the fact that on mid and long term, the alternative of open source software receives all attention.
Don't know about there, but here the bureaucrats (did I get the spelling right?) have an upper hand over politicians. Politicians are there in the office just for few years - bureaucrats are there for decades. And bureaucrats have more technical knowledge than politicians (at least here).
As of now I have no doubt whatsoever that Microsoft is excessively bribing the deciders in the european political open source and software patent discussion. Simple and flat out. Deciders that don't have the haziest of concepts of what software and open source is about get invited to sessions with "software-experts" on 100 percent MS payroll, taking all their crap for granted. And most certainly later on cut a deal on consulting or for holding a keynote or something other.
The irish EU presidency saw the up to then most extreme case, with the president taking a 180 turn of the decision the EU-parlament had issued not longer than a half a year earlyer on software patents.
We are about to see more of this.
I very much welcome the EU officials looking into this and (hopefully) preparing appropriate measures of dealing with flat-out violations of law like this one.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
Dutch = relating to The Netherlands (country) or it main language.
"Holland" is just a small part of The Netherlands (2 provinces: South Holland and North Holland combined).
If you refer to the coutry, its people, or its language, the correct terms are "The Netherlands (Nederland)", "The Dutch (Nederlanders)", and "Dutch (Nederlands)".
Last time I post first thing after getting up!
Well, you shouldn't post before getting up either.
Ok, just to clear up some of the confusion people have stirred up:
"Dutch" means of the Netherlands, AKA Holland.
Technically, Holland is just a part of the Netherlands. However, I do not believe refering to the country as "Holland" is incorrect any more than refering to the USA as "America" is incorrect. It's common usage.
Groeten aan alle nederlandse slasdotters!
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
English is almost as much of an PITA as dutch...
anyhoo, dutch refers to the old word that was used for the dutch language, 'duits'. Which is in effect now used for the german language...
To the point: I've created an translation of BOF's open letter. Its not perfect, so please send corrections to bartwiegmans@gmail.com
It's located at home.kabelfoon.nl/~bwiegm/index.html
Ok, so which would you rather have?
They stay with MS for the time being, spend some extra money, and keep applying those patches?
Or they switch all everything over right now, and everything comes crashing down because the sysadmins are not competent with the new software?
I think a gradual switch is definitely preferable. This seems to be exactly what is happening (the text clearly states that OSS remains the goal for the long term).
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
Have been tried many times, it creates chaos. Take Iraq. You remove the Baath party and everything collapses.
Not to be cynical, but it seems what civilisation is all about is.. Bureaucracy. It is not like evolution or liberalism etc. has removed it. We have as much as the Romans did and even more.
let's avoid being indignated and be constructive against such practices.
The reason people are indignant is that they've seen it before and there is nothing the common man can do to fight it. In the USA, despite all the outrage online RIAA and MPAA still get whatever bills and lawsuits they need into action; there was a huge grassroots effort to stop, then overturn the DMCA and it still exists; people have been "raising hell" about the PATRIOT Act for years now to no avail; and when citizens have voted locally in states to pass such things as medical marijuana, stem cell research and gay marriage laws, they have only prompted attack by the Feds.
This is what happens when you sign your power over to others for collective use; they use it to further their own ends and the ends of their friends, inevitably. This is the reason for the concept of inalienable rights outlined in several historical documents including the Magna Carta and the US Declaration of Independence.
In this particular case, Dutch parliament has decided a year back that the right tool for the job would be open source software. Government however now completely ignores parliament and attempts to con up an exclusive deal with Microsoft. It might too difficult to go a full open-source route right away, but striking a deal that will tie the government (plus its public documents) to the beast of Redmond for a couple of years exclusively means, in essence, that government has ignored parliament. And this is not the first time.
The political system is, in its way of making decisions, very far from the way you makes decisions in IT departments, small and big (there is of course a certain political influence even here). But for politicians it is not about having the most efficient system. It doesn't matter if it is expensive as long as you have control and can avoid scandals. MS offers exactly the kind of control that politicians like. With MS they talk to people in suits that can be manipulated economically. This is preferable to Idealist.
The good thing is that their fear of scandal can be used and that is what have happened, recently. The politicians worst nightmare is to look like a crafty bureaucrat and therefore they actually respond to the public pointing out the inconsistency of their arguments. We will see lots of this kind of things in the near future and that is a good thing. This whole slashdot story is about somebody trying to sneak MS in the backdoor. Five years ago nobody would have noticed.
In case someone is interested, I was bored and translated the open letter. The [...] remarks are translation notes added by me. I did it pretty quickly so there are probably quite a few spelling and other mistakes. You have been warned.
To:
Prime-Minister Balkenende
Ministry of General Affairs
PO box 20001
2500 EA the Hague
fax 070-3564683
Minister De Graaf
Ministry of Internal Affairs and Kingdomsrelations
PO box 20011
2500 EA the Hague
fax 070-3639153
Minister Brinkhorst
Ministry of Economic Affairs
PO box 20101
2500 EC the Hague
Transcripts to:
Permanent commision for Economic Affairs
Second chamber of the States-General [Dutch Parliament]
PO box 20018
2500 EA the Hague
fax 070-3183439
Permanent commision for Internal Affairs and Kingdomsrelations
Second chamber of the States-General [Dutch Parliament]
PO box 20018
2500 EA the Hague
fax 070-3183444
Send by fax and lettermail.
Amsterdam, 10th of december 2004
Subject: state government[literaly the kingdoms' government in Dutch] contract with Microsoft
Very honored mister Balkenende, de Graaf, Brinkhorst,
The Automationguide of Friday 3rd of december reported that the state government and some muncipalities want to close an exclusive contract worth 147 milion Euro and a term of five years with Microsoft. In the realization thereof no public bidding took place.
Undersigned organisations are worried about this intention and want to make you aware of the negative effects that such a contract has on the software market and the climate of inovation in the Netherlands. Likewise such a contract is contrary to the by the Cabinet stipulated policy regarding the use of open standards and open source at the government level and the aspiration to make the government less depandant of a single software supplier. On top of this Microsoft has been convicted by the European Commision because of poor interoperability of its server software.
On the 20th of november 2002 the Second chamber spoke out unanimously for the motion [a proposal by the Parliament to the government] Vendrik in which the Government was asked to counteract concentrations in the software market, to make sure that in 2006 all sofware used by the public sector adheres to open standards and to "actively stimulate the spreading and development of software with open sourcecode (open source software) in the public sector and formulate concrete and ambitious goals for this".
The ministries of BZK [internal affairs] and EZ [economic affairs] have set up the programme Open Standards and Open Source Software (OSOSS) to stimulate government organizations in a wide sense to use open standards in their ICT-applications. Moreover the programme Purchasing Taskasignment (PIT) has set up a ICT-purchasestrategy for the state government in which the following starting points have been included: guaranteeing of interoperability and the avoidance and where necesary breaking of vendor lock-in.
Undersigned organizations are of the opinion that the closing of such a contract with Microsoft will to the locking of the door in the coming five years with regards to the application of open standards, free software and open source software. The now held contract negotiations are squarly oposed to the motion Vendrik and undermine the positive results of the OSOSS programme. On top of this the carefully formulated targets of the PIT are being bypassed.
Undersigned organizations call on the Cabinet to take in take in hand the usage of open standards, free software and open source software seriously and ambitiously. Meanwhile there are sufficient initiatives within the government that proof that such software kan offer many advantages on the areas of interoperability, security and costs.
In the opinion of the undersigned a contract of s
However, I do not believe refering to the country as "Holland" is incorrect any more than refering to the USA as "America" is incorrect. It's common usage.
On quite a different scale however...
About country names: the Dutch call Germany "Duitsland", the Germans themselves call it "Deutschland". "Dutch" meaning "from Holland" is therefor quite remarkable. We Dutch call ourselves "Nederlanders" or "Hollanders" and our neigbours are named "Duitsers". When we Dutch people talk about Germans ("Germanen") we refer to a people that once lived in western Europe (Germanic tribe). Still get it?
In our national anthem however, we sing "ben ik van Duitschen bloed", literally "am I of Dutch blood", indicating that even to the Dutch it is not quite clear wether to be called "Dutch" is a good or a 'bad' thing. Since there is no real alternative to "Dutch" in English I have no objection.
What makes me raise my eyebrows on occasion is the way that the Netherlands seems to be on a particularly anti-european or pro-american (depending on your viewpoint) bent in recent years. The Dutch military choosing the American Apache helicopter instead of the Eurocopter Tiger. The Dutch military choosing the american M-16 rifle for some reason that no one can quite fathom. The Dutch choosing to participate in the F-35 JSF fighter consortium which hasn't really brought them any benefits. The Dutch signing on to the Iraq war fiasco, which wasn't even very popular in Holland at the time. And now the great Microsoft deal of the century when just about every other country in the world, let alone Europe, is at least looking at Open Source alternatives.
There are probably some good business and political reasons behind this but more often than not, the Dutch decisions seem to me to some kind of attempt to deliberately put the Germans and the French at a distance. I can understand that in a way as Holland is smaller than those two and could fear being overruled by them, but it mostly comes across as the epitomy of the old saying "Cutting off one's nose to spite one's face", i.e. doing something on principle even though it has no benefit to one.
Sadly, a lot of stuff in the EU seems to happen like this where national self interest can torpedo some very good projects (and bad as well, to be fair).
Sometimes some of the fries make it west accross the "afsluitdijk" and cause havoc in Amsterdam before they are beaten up by the locals. If you ever see a fight in Amsterdam it is always a farmer from friesland or it close relative groningen.
Every country got parts it ain't proud off. Americans got the bible belt. The united kingdom got wales. Germany got all off germany and The Netherlands got friesland. We are still trying to convince them to start a war of independence.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Since then "Balkenende" has shown a complete lack of leadership skill. His party has tried to force through cuts in pension plans despire massive opposotiion from the unions, industry AND the goverments economic think tank. Massive demonstations have no effect EVEN a gigantic drop in the polls has no effect. Even in cases where both industry AND unions together without threath of strikes agree to compensate the cuts for the workers involved the goverment wants to outlaw this.
This is part of a much larger problem in europe. You see for all the talk about america and its two party system and the Bushes and Haliburtons there is one thing to remember. People are talking about the problems in america. Michael Moore does make his documenturies. There is no such thing in holland or for that matter the EU.
Whenever you hear about corruption/incompetence/complacency in america the exact same thing is happening in europe. Withone tiny little difference. Nobody is talking about it.
Basically what you got is corrupt system, not the kind of corruption you see in the movies with brown envolopes but a far deeper backroom deals going unquestioned for ever corruption of the mind. Most of the people involved wouldn't even be able to consider taking "hospitality" from MS as being corrupted. They live in their own world wich has been carefully drained of everyone who questions things.
If you want to see the idea. Examine "group think" on places like /.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
The government (anybody's government) is a huge bureaucratic organization that is comprised of people who primarily want stability. They want nothing to threaten their position, pension, and job security.
Given a choice of spending other people's money (your's, the taxpayer) or going with a group that has no formal organization that can take legal responsibility when systems break down, the bureaucrats will always chose buying the service from another large organization. That way they are protected. The fact that Linux Open Source is a better situation for the taxpayers and government information systems is secondary.
There are three ways to deal with this situation:
Pass laws requiring the use of open-source. This won't work because bureaucrats will always twist the law to fit their needs, which in this case is to 'cover their ass' when (not if) the information system breaks down.
Make Microsoft unaffordable Stop paying taxes in a big way so that the government doesn't have the money available to afford the Microsoft solution. This won't work because the government can use any amount violence to take your money from you, and because Microsoft can lower the initial offering price to almost nothing to secure the contract. This will work in developing countries, eventually, but not in the EU or USA.
Have open source so widely used that Microsoft can't link into the established framework This won't work because Microsoft will always allow free limited distribution of its product (by technically permitting unpaid copies to be made of Windows and Office) enough to keep itself being the defacto standard in use.
The only way that the open source community can win against Microsoft in government procurement contracts is to be so transparently better that the government buyers will be willing to overlook its stark disadvantages (to the bureaucrats) in order to have a greatly superior product.
This can't happen because great software is mostly the result of great individual programmers.
Microsoft has the funds to buy their work, talents, and focus for its exclusive use in Windows. The only way that Microsoft can fail here is if they refuse to pay their most highly productive 'superstar' programmers enough, or refuse to make the necessary effort to recruit them in the first place. Given that MS is run by super programmers (even if he is retired from actual coding) like Bill Gates, this too is unlikely.
The only way to beat Microsoft is convince them to hire mediocre executive leadership. This is the only way to beat any large powerful organization.
... the elctorate get the govemrnet they deserve.
In the Netherlands they decided that a populist, unexperienced "party" was a good choice while many sane people in th rest of Europe were rolling their eyes in disbelief.
Well, now you have the consequences.
Goverments had never governed (and they should not, IMHO) based on demonstrations or opinion polls. Goverments are suppossed to have a plan and they should try to implement it.
How from a clueless goverment elected by, pardon the battering, clueless people, you jump to your tirade about corruption, is baffling.
To say that corruption is swept under the carpet in Europe is ludicrous. Berlusconi in Italy just was half aquited on corruption charges, a close ally was sentenced to 9 years for mafia links. In Germany people close to Helmut Khol were sentenced for all kind of muddy dealings, in the UK politicians that fail to live to expections regularly have to resing and in some cases even go to jail.
Your ascertion is completely untrue and clueless, corruption is fought all around Europe.
Compare that with Ronald Reagan and his mob, breaking the law, and living to be hailed as heroes for doing so.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
The reason people are indignant is that they've seen it before and there is nothing the common man can do to fight it. In the USA, despite all the outrage online RIAA and MPAA still get whatever bills and lawsuits they need into action; there was a huge grassroots effort to stop, then overturn the DMCA and it still exists;
Where'd did you ever get that the idea there was a "huge" grassroots movement? Nobody has been canvassing my neighborhood to sign petitions nor have I seen any million person anti-DMCA marches on Washington. Sure it's a common topic on some internet sites but it's rarely mentioned in the mainstream media.
Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
Peruvian Congressman Villanueva wrote a scathing letter to a Microsoft representative who tried to railroad him into an argument centered on price and how practical it would be to let Microsoft fulfill all of one's technical needs (Villanueva did not take the bait and debunked every one of the MS rep's arguments, noting in part that "it is not enough that it [the software] is technically capable of fulfilling a task"). Villanueva demanded the freedoms of free software (he was particular about which movement he sides with) and free formats for goverment use. His bill did not require free software to be used in Peruvian government work nor does it require Microsoft to change its executives.
The free software movement makes no demands who is or becomes Microsoft's executives, yet Microsoft is nervous. Microsoft has toured the country proclaiming the GNU General Public License to be like a cancer and destructive to one's "intellectual property". They are losing seats (hence their willingness to give away Microsoft Windows in some cases) and Microsoft is losing the web server market to Apache, Firefox is eating into their web browser dominance, and most importantly Microsoft provides no software freedom for their most popular programs. Even if we look at this issue in the narrow terms of market popularity, if their market lead were only vulnerable by those who somehow "convince them to hire mediocre executive leadership" they would not need to expend any effort denouncing copylefted free software.
Digital Citizen