Slashdot Mirror


Scottish Police Revert to Microsoft Office

LordGuha writes "The Central Scotland Policy is removing StarOffice and replacing it with Microsoft Office citing lower maintenance and running costs and greater integration with other departments. According to the article StarOffice was implemented in 2000 when the department was low in cash but lately have estimated that the Microsoft software would cost no more and lead to greater efficiencies."

49 of 699 comments (clear)

  1. Only 5% of users were using StarOffice by nokilli · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The other 95% were using Microsoft Office. So that answers why they were having so much trouble with StarOffice. They weren't. They were having trouble working with everybody else using Microsoft Office.

    You know, it's crazy giving cops tools like Microsoft Office or StarOffice in the first place. 99.99% of people who use word processors don't get past the part where you hit keys and watch text appear on the screen. Oh yeah, and open and save documents. That's all they ever do.

    I'd bet real money that the textarea element in a browser like Firefox provides all the text-editing functionality that these people need, especially if you add spell correct via JavaScript. Hit submit and there's your save function, to a central server that can be accessed from any department. Click a link and there's your file open functionality. Amazing!

    You can even do forms! LOL

    Why aren't they using a system like this? Because some idiot somewhere equates more-expensive with easier-to-use. It's the oldest story in IT, and it's always a tragedy.
    --
    Why didn't you know?

    1. Re:Only 5% of users were using StarOffice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      So that answers why they were having so much trouble with StarOffice

      No it doesn't answer the question. In all business cases, supporting two competing, parallel systems is going to cost you more, regardless of what they are. Add to the mix that MS Office is the defacto standard for office docs and you can see that it's easy to make the decision to do away with StarOffice, no matter how well it stands up on its own.

      As for the comments about being able to do a police desk job using a textarea in a browser? Hmmm... quite laughable. I'd take your point about Office having features they don't need, but this is true of 99% of software in 99% of situations. I'd rather have access to functions I don't use than not have access to a bunch of stuff that could save me time.

    2. Re:Only 5% of users were using StarOffice by Doctor_Jest · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No, actually, according to the article, the deployment of "solutions" (read: applets and things) in StarOffice, optimized for Open Source software, was causing problems of accessibility in other departments. According to the article:

      "It was also more difficult to configure the open-source software so that police officers could access their files from any police station."

      It, like you said, costs "more" to implement parallel solutions in certain instances simply because while supporting both, it's never easiest to take into consideration making things play nice together.

      It's always "I want to use feature X", but product Y doesn't support feature X. So they return to products that support feature X, rather than doing a little homework and providing a solution that works best for all the systems. Deploying a mixed network is always more difficult, but it isn't impossible, and with a little effort, could be more efficient and better in the long run for everyone by removing Microsoft's stranglehold on the vertical monopoly. (like their stifling hold on "Office" standards.)

      I would rather have none of the features I don't need and the ability to use my files and documents how I see fit, rather than allowing Microsoft to dictate what I can and cannot do with my own data. Text files may be something Johnny Windows users don't like because it doesn't have "pretty fonts" and such, but you can bet long after Microsoft is dead, those text files will still be accessible. And since this whole thing is about complying with some sort of "Freedom of Information Act of 2002", I'd have thought it better to look long-term rather than going back to Microsoft without the lube. Honestly, can anyone name a "feature" of Microsoft Office that is so grand, living without it will bring the world to a halt? Well, let's just say one that couldn't be duplicated with a little bit of effort using open standards and free software. (Convenience is a curse sometimes...)

      It sounds as though Microsoft's "solution" is simply "well, the other folks are doing it..." And no matter who you are, that's never the ideal solution....

      And yes, as an engineer, I detest Office. So take what I say with that bias in mind.

      --
      It's the Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man.
    3. Re:Only 5% of users were using StarOffice by mumblestheclown · · Score: 2, Insightful
      You know, it's crazy giving cops tools like Microsoft Office or StarOffice in the first place. 99.99% of people who use word processors don't get past the part where you hit keys and watch text appear on the screen. Oh yeah, and open and save documents. That's all they ever do.

      So, if I understand you correctly: yesterday, when they were using Star Office (officially), they were the paragons of forward thinking. Today, they are knuckle draggers who dont even need computers, probably, as most of them are probably illiterate anyway.

      To suggest that a police force needs nothing more than a simple text editor is supreme arrogance. You have ZERO CLUE what you are talking about.

      Whoever modded you "insightful" should be ashamed.

    4. Re:Only 5% of users were using StarOffice by MSFanBoi · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This has NOTHING to do with Linux. It has to do with Star Office vs. Microsoft Office. One would think one would easily understand that by simple reading skills.

    5. Re:Only 5% of users were using StarOffice by dknj · · Score: 2, Insightful

      people forget why word had a hard time beating wordperfect. because everyone knew wordperfect and didn't want to relearn a new product (back in the dos days). office tookover because they had a much nicer interface when windows came out and wordperfect still stayed in dos land. star/openoffice is going to need to tote 100% compatability with word and give a word compatability chart to explain how to do the same tasks in SO/OO. until this happens, no one (average joe) is going to want to sit down and figure it out.

    6. Re:Only 5% of users were using StarOffice by ednopantz · · Score: 4, Insightful

      RTFA.

      The problems were document portability AND integration with other users. This is there MS cleans up and where OSS falls down completely. How many integrated OSS packages are there that play nicely? (See Info Week this week for some beginnings). Ten years since debut, even something as simple as LAMP is still a PITA to set up and configure. Where is the OSS answer to Exchange??

      I just saw a demo of MS SBA and let me say I'm glad I'm not Quicken. It does all the usual Quicken stuff, but leverages the Office suite to do it all better. Integrating multiple tools: That is where their advantage lies.

      Maybe, just maybe, 90% of the market isn't completely wrong. Maybe the most successful company in history makes products that are slightly better than what amateurs put together in their spare time. Maybe packages that come from one organization (or are bought from their creators and Borg-ed) beat those cobbled together from the efforts thousands of volunteers, occassionally undrwritten by consulting firms out to make system so hard to configure you need to pay for consultants to do everything. Just a suggestion from someone who talks to real users guys.

      I have to admit I loved seeing this article, knowing the howls of shock and indignation that would soon come from the slashbots.

    7. Re:Only 5% of users were using StarOffice by 1u3hr · · Score: 2, Insightful
      To suggest that a police force needs nothing more than a simple text editor is supreme arrogance.

      One of the major reasons cited for going back to MS was that MS was supplying the whole force with an application to "comply with Freedom of Information requests". This sounds to me like a database. Obviously, (well, to me) starting with Word files, MS is going to have the best shot at doing this at all, not to mention they will subsiduse it to make the whole deal sweet.

      However, if you thought WHY the police are using PCs and not typewriters, as they were a very short time ago, it should not just be to give prettier printouts, but because it lets them automate filing and data-mining their reports. And using plain text makes this much easier. (Do cops need to worry if it's in Palatino, Garamond or Comic Sans?) More structure can be added; but they would have done much better starting from automating their forms, filled out with plain text, than using a general word-processing package with far too many features and shoehorning it into a database system.

    8. Re:Only 5% of users were using StarOffice by Fujisawa+Sensei · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Maybe the most successful company in history makes products that are slightly better than what amateurs put together in their spare time.

      What makes you think we're amateurs? I think you should check some of the OS MLs out there. Apache Xerces had full time engineers from Sun and IBM working on the project as their job. Other project are the same.

      --
      If someone is passing you on the right, you are an asshole for driving in the wrong lane.
    9. Re:Only 5% of users were using StarOffice by Ravnen · · Score: 2, Insightful
      This is only a guess, but I expect they have a lot of standard forms, with automated processes for finding the right forms, filling them in, saving them to the right places, sending copies to the right people and so on. A word processor can be used for much more than just expressing text.

      Apart from word processing, there are also a lot of things I can imagine they would use Excel for, and even PowerPoint. They could also be using Access, but there are much better databases available, so I don't think they would be using MS Office for that.

      I don't much like Word, but Excel is something I use a lot, and no other spreadsheet I've tried is good enough to convince me to use it instead. Besides, everyone I know uses Excel, so why bother with some other spreadsheet?

    10. Re:Only 5% of users were using StarOffice by kilgortrout · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Can't you MS apologists find some another choice of words in your anti OSS diatribes. Ever since Balmer first uttered the words "cobbled together" to describe open source, these words have been repeatedly used in MS propaganda ever since. Let's face it; MS products are also cobbled together by paid lackeys that hate their jobs. Does that make you feel any better.

    11. Re:Only 5% of users were using StarOffice by afidel · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I wonder if there was any reason that they were NOT saving files to Office/RTF format rather than native Staroffice format? RTF would allow them to be opened in any OS and just about any modern editor, thus avoiding compatibility problems at the loss of a little bit of functionality.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    12. Re:Only 5% of users were using StarOffice by diamondsw · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Wow, so your projects have a couple full time engineers. Guess what - Microsoft has hundreds if not thousands of them working on their projects, and they are all marching to the beat of the same drummer. Whether or not you like the direction they're heading, they are all working together to make a truly integrated product. Linux and OSS development does not do this, but rather takes pride in its lack of consistency and direction.

      --
      I don't know what kind of crack I was on, but I suspect it was decaf.
    13. Re:Only 5% of users were using StarOffice by Kainaw · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Ten years since debut, even something as simple as LAMP is still a PITA to set up and configure. Where is the OSS answer to Exchange??

      First, I assume you were not drawing a comparison between Linux/Apache/MySQL/PHP and Exchange.

      Second, what is the PITA? If you don't want to know how the software works, don't install it manually. Just type: "yum install apache mysql php-mysql" and you'll have a generic semi-secure LAMP system. After you do that, making it secure and customizing it is just as much a PITA as trying to configure IIS, ASP, and MSSQL. It took me weeks to figure out that IIS can't handle "my-sample-domain.com" as a home directory because it sees the ".com" before it notices it is a directory.

      --
      The previous comment is purposely vague and generalized, but all of the facts are completely true.
    14. Re:Only 5% of users were using StarOffice by rocker_wannabe · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yes, Please RTFA!

      from the article:

      "Help from Microsoft in other areas may have influenced the decision. The company plans to work with Scottish police to develop an electronic document management system to help it comply with requests made under the 2002 Freedom of Information Act, and a document sharing system for police staff, Microsoft said."

      Maybe using Microsoft products doesn't cause you a problem because you can play Solitare without calling technical support but some of us who actually have to make complicated systems work have good reason for despising Microsoft. If you think configuring LAMP is a PITA then you are a completely non-technical person who shouldn't even be posting on Slashdot. It's called "News for Nerds" not "News for non-technical people who don't like to be reminded that are supporting a corporation convicted of wrongdoing by the government".

      --
      "Meaningless!, Meaningless!" says the Teacher. "Utterly meaningless!"
    15. Re:Only 5% of users were using StarOffice by Delphiki · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Can you back that up at all? My experience is that people who do things for their own fulfillment (whether software, woodworking, or haberdashery) tend to take more personal pride in their craft than paid assembly-line workers. This is a generalization, of course.

      Well, let's start by pointing out how bad your generalization is. First of all, there's a huge difference between building things for crafts and manufacturing things that are commodities. The difference in quality between the two things has little to do with the skill of the designer and more to do with the amount of time and cost involved. Comparing hand-crafted wood furniture made by a master woordworker to something I can go buy from a local department store in terms of quality is a worthless comparison. One cost orders of magnitute more effort to create, and would cost orders of magnitute more money to purhcase. On the other hand, I would be willing to bet that many more programmers hours have gone into writing and fine-tuning Microsoft Office than Open Office, and the cost of ownership isn't an order of magnitude difference in either direction.

      In addition, all of the programmers I know are programmers because they want to be and like coding. We're not forced into slave labor by evil corporations. We take a lot of pride in our work.

      Also, just about every good professional programmer I know is constantly trying to teach themselves knew and better ways to do things. On the other hand, huge numbers of OSS projects use backwards methodologies (such as insisting everything be done in C, or disallowing the STL for no reason other than they've heard it's bad). Plus many OSS projects are started because someone wants to write a piece of software that does a very specific task, than gradually expanded into a real project. But this eliminates the design phase (even if we allow that most OSS projects have one) which will not lead to improved software.

      Can't you respond to any criticism of your MS views without calling people OSS fanatics or mentioning OSS religion?

      I can, but why bother? You see, your whole original post was nothing more than attempting to wave away the oppositions arguments by calling them an apologist and calling their comment propaganda. I actually made some points, in addition to just showing my disdain for OSS apologists who don't care about facts when they don't fit their arguments. See the difference? No, I guess you wouldn't.

      *Ahem* Did you preview your own post?

      Yes, and I reread it again, and I still think my original post was an accurate critique of yours. I still fail to see how your original post, as well as now also your second post amounts to enough value to be worth the bandwidth you consumed sending it to slashdot. I consider the spam emails which are so convoluted that you can barely read them to be a more valuable use of bandwidth than anything you've said.

      --

      Feel free to mod me "-1 - Angry Jerk".

    16. Re:Only 5% of users were using StarOffice by Master+of+Transhuman · · Score: 1, Insightful

      "it was also more difficult to configure the open-source software so that police officers could access their files from any police station, he said"

      In other words, a bunch of MCSE's couldn't figure out NFS.

      This is a FUD piece written and distributed by Microsoft as usual.

      Nothing to see here.

      --
      Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
  2. A poster news by CSHARP123 · · Score: 1, Insightful

    This will be a poster news for Microsoft, they go about everywhere touting this news and telling people open source/Free software are useless.

  3. I hate these excuses by polysylabic+psudonym · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I work as a software designer for an Australian government department. They use the same sort of excuses for sticking with MS. In that case at least, it's lies. They stick with MS because it's executives that make the decisions and they get information from only two sources: MS sales staff and noisy linux zealots from within their own staff.

    The zealots come off as zealots and are thus dismissed as having nothing useful to say.

    The MS sales staff have "consultant" in their job title and are thus deigned (by the senior execs) to be experts on all things computerish.

    Of course to those of us who grok operating environments and who don't grok executives and consultants see said executives as fools and their reasons as invalid.

    Oh well.

  4. For those of you wondering why... by domipheus · · Score: 3, Insightful

    .. this costs less, is well be cause of this:

    TIME = MONEY * 3

    In this sort of situation, the extra time it takes to convert documents to different formats, and keep those formats updated, totally outweighs the point of moving systems in the first place.

    This should be a lesson to organisations, if you want to go open source; do it right - and change all systems at once.

  5. Hmmmmm... by DanielNS84 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm reminded of the "E-Learning" system at Best Buy...I think if they switched to Open Office and had a short but mandatory training module before they started working with it on how to use and convert any applicable proprietary formats to be compatible with all the Microsoft things they could save money on licensing. Unless Microsoft drops their prices WAY down for corporate customers they have plenty of money to implement an OSS solution and integrate it to be just as easy to use.

  6. I don't understand by suezz · · Score: 2, Insightful

    why it is up to openoffice to try to read microsoft's documents. you know its a free download go get it and install it so you can read the people's documents that are created in openoffice.

    openoffice uses open standards for file saving and microsoft doesn't - this isn't rocket science people. just run them side by side until you totally switch to open office.

  7. how dare you... by bvdbos · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ...post this on /.

    It's like swearing in the church (as we in Holland use to call it). Actually, in my company I've made the same calculation. I use some program's which only work with MS Office and it would cost me more to have them rewritten then to buy the 10 licenses for ms-office. Also, the employees would have to learn openoffice/staroffice which is easily done, but the time it will take to give support for questions like "how do I change my stylesheet", "how does this work..." etc will cost me even more then the licenses alone...

  8. *Sigh* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    First time I've ever posted here, and I really knew what to expect from this thread, but I had to say this.

    We all automatically assume that the police organization doesn't know what it's doing, doesn't know how to perform cost-benefit analysis, and all are just a bunch of non-tech-savvy pawns. They made the switch to OpenOffice *5* years ago. You don't think that's enough time to give something a shot and evaluate it? You don't think that's enough time to see how much something is going to cost or impact your organization? You don't think that they had people working on it and trying to honestly switch to OSS? Unless you work there, I think your post is way out of line (as well as a lot of others in this thread).

    I'm not a Microsoft apologist, but why can't you see past your own point of view? OSS isn't better just because it's free or because it's not Microsoft. Sheesh. Give these people some credit for at least trying something new.

    1. Re:*Sigh* by nokilli · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm not disputing the accuracy of their cost-benefit analysis.

      I'm simply pointing out that the reason they reached this conclusion wasn't because they were using StarOffice, but because everybody else was using Microsoft Office.

      The costs were in getting StarOffice to work with Microsoft Office. The article makes it sound like it's the fault of StarOffice. It isn't. It's Microsoft who throws up the barriers to prevent OSS from working with their software, not the other way around.

      If everybody else were using StarOffice, no way would they be switching to Microsoft Office.
      --
      Why didn't you know?

    2. Re:*Sigh* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So they were right switching back to Office. If 95% of the departments are using Office and it works well, if that doubles the work because every templates for their report/DB must be created on Office and StarOffice, and if the OSS contractor charged as much as Microsoft, why on earth would they use StarOffice!?! You must put yourself at their place, and forget about the OSS/M$ thing. From their point of view, they have two competiting office-style applications. Both have their advantages and their disadvantages. They have to decide based on that, not based on a "hatred for M$" or a "love for the OSS". Even if M$ Office and StarOffice did interact really well, that would still probably not be a good idea to have to support two different softwares. It's more complicated than saying "M$ sucks, OSS rules!"

      Also, remember, it's the police, they have confidential information to keep, so, even if they wanted to ask the help of the community, they could not. ("Dear OSS Community, we are having a problem loading the profile of John Smith, social security number 123-456-789. Here is the file, can you check why it's not loading correctly? Thanks!") It is easy to sign a contract with a NDA with M$ (and to sue M$ if there is a leak), but it is harder to do the same thing with a community.

      OSS is really great, but not always... (i am so gonna be flamed for just thinking that OSS is not always the best!)

    3. Re:*Sigh* by DogDude · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Maybe if the entire Linux community (not just the software developers) offered their products and services for free Linux would be cheaper than MS.

      Cool! I'm glad you think so! If you would, please show up at our store (you can find the address on the website), and install Linux on all of our PC's along with an open source point of sale system, and an open source accounting package. It should be a seamless transition. Sunday mornings are the best time for us. Looking forward to seeing you then!

      --
      I don't respond to AC's.
    4. Re:*Sigh* by ccbailey · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Hey, you should seriously ask if you're actually interested. Someone might just take you up on that offer. Hell, I might if I lived in North Carolina...

    5. Re:*Sigh* by sydb · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If you read the post in context maybe you wouldn't waste your time with pointless replies.

      I was pointing out a fallacy in LibertineR's argument, where he hasn't understood the meaning of the post he was replying to.

      In an argument, a winning tactic is to actually understand your opponent's position. It wins because you either argue against it more effectively, or you realise that you agree! For agreement to happen, you have to approach the argument as a battle of ideas, not a battle of wills. May the best idea win.

      Favourable outcomes are not possible if you don't make the effort to understand and instead twist your opponent's position beyond recognition.

      --
      Yours Sincerely, Michael.
  9. Star Office Problems. by jellomizer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There are still some major problems for Star Office.

    First it normally defaultly saves in Star Office Format not MS Word format, yes this is an easy change but people when they are done just hit the save Icon and they are done, they don't want to go threw tens of choices and find the document that everyone else uses.

    Second Individuals has invested time in MS Office. From those High School Computer Class to College Classes, CS101. The education system for computers are so dumb that they teach people how to use Microsoft Word but not a Word Processor. So almost everyone who enters the Work field know Office.

    Third Speed. Open Office has had a speed problem from day 1. Yea Office isn't a speed daemon but it is fast where the users feel it is important, boot up and typing and saving.

    Forth Interface. Open Office is setup with a good interface for Linux but not for Windows or Mac. This is actually very important to know the OS you are porting to and follow the OS's Interface guidelines. If you don't the application looks 3rd party and just doesn't feel right.

    Fifth Work Flow. Open Offices goal is to create all the functionality and compatibility of Office but it forgot to get the work flow. Watch a non technical person use Office and you will see that their ways of solving problems may surprise you. They avoid using Style Sheets and just go for the Font Drop Down, except for hitting tab they will use the space and they never ever use hot keys for anything. The menus are off limit to them (The same with the windows start button) If they don't see it it must be an advanced feature that they shouldn't use.

    Open Office is good for techs but not for normal people

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  10. The important part: by Assmasher · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "and the need to interoperate more smoothly with other departments running Windows."

    Aka, dominance brings it own appeal.

    --
    Loading...
  11. The Microsoft Heresies by Morrigu · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'll probably get strung up on a length of Cat5 by enraged slashdotters for writing this, but there's a reason why people who have used MS Office products tend to continue using them: they're well-designed, and they work well enough for most purposes. I'm not talking about accountants and actuaries who try to shoehorn Excel + VB macros into acting like a Real Programming Language for financial calculations, but the mere fact that you have fax templates, that you can copy and paste easily from one app to another, and that you can run a decent little database using Access if you want. That as a manager running an office, you can put "skilled with MS Office applications" in a job ad for a secretary and find someone who can at least click through menus and generate the documents you need. That the applications look professional and clean and they come with a support number for a company that will not go out of business anytime soon. That the company will at least attempt to help you fix your problems and whom you can blame if something goes horribly wrong. ("It's not my fault, it's that damn Microsoft app!" you say to your VP who's pissed at the monthly reports being late again.)

    OpenOffice is pretty good, and I use it exclusively on my work laptop running Ubuntu, but my choice in running Linux and other open-source applications is all about my freedom to use, redistribute and modify the application as I see fit, unencumbered by restrictive EULAs and software patents and all the baggage that goes along with shrink-wrapped commercial software. I'm willing to take the time and effort necessary to re-learn how to copy formulas instead of values in a spreadsheet app, where the default save locations live in the word processing app, and how to turn off the @#$(*! assistant. Most people don't care that much, and are willing to spend the money to use something they're familiar with and that is a de facto standard instead of taking the harder path. And don't get me wrong, it is harder to use even something as pretty and polished as Ubuntu + OpenOffice for a user familiar with Microsoft products, although it's a damn sight easier than it was 5 years ago.

    Most people are lazy, and want to get things done as simply as possible. Big software companies take advantage of that, both at a personal and a corporate level. There's a reason why Microsoft is the gigantic software behemoth that it is, and that's because it understands this and understands how to sell products to individuals and organizations. That doesn't mean that its software is technologically superior, or more fun to hack on, or more free to use; but it makes people buy more stuff from them.

    --
    "We can categorically state that we have not released man-eating badgers into the area." - Major Mike Shearer, UK
  12. Re:Did anyone read TFA by Jarnis · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You need to be a large organization, and threaten to move to OSS (or have already done so).

    Then you get a killer deal - for a few years. Let's see 3 years from now what the yearly cost is after that. Maybe 200$/seat. Or more. But hey, at that point people calculate that moving (back) to OSS is (slightly) more expensive than paying MS again for another contract.

    Free/cheap samples or initial contracts are nice way to milk a customer to max later on. MS can think long-term - they are willing to dump some short-term profits for long term wins. They'll milk the difference back over the next 10-15 years - probably several times over.

  13. Re:Still? by Kjella · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You know, I used to be the standard-bearer for that argument, but as of OO 1.9x, interoperability with MS is getting pretty damned good. Particularly the word processor.

    Well, I doubt anyone will jump from StarOffice (read: commercial and with some level of support) past OpenOffice to run their police department on a beta OpenOffice version. Granted, it's getting there but it's not released yet. OpenOffice 1.x got a foot in the door, but it takes more to outdo MS Office, which is in fact quite polished.

    Kjella

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  14. Nah, it was a smart move on all parts by hey! · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Having worn both hats, geek and suit, I have to say you can't make this kind of decision purely on technical OR non-technical criteria. You have to use all your knowledge to do what's best for the organization.

    Personally, I'd have taken this deal if I were the IT director, and I'm borderline Linux zealot. You take Ceasars salt, you do Ceasars bidding -- and if crucifiction doesn't appela to you, you look after his interests. MS offered them a deal that's a no-brainer. Just do the math.

    They have about 1000 officers plus support staff. Don't know how many licenses this is but MS offered them a package deal at £60,000, which divided by the staff works out to £60/body/year. So it's as close to free beer as makes no difference, especially if this saves a staff position a year dealing with the fact nearly everyone else uses MS. Let's say that financially, it's the same as getting the software for free.

    Add to this that the deal includes software they need to comply with legal requirements, software they estimate they'd have paid £100,000 to build custom, and now they're far ahead. It's the same old story, fortunately less common today than a few years ago: the app I need isn't available on Linux. In a couple of years when the deal runs out, the free alternatives will have closed the gap more, either forcing the market price of MS software down, or making it even more feasible to switch over if that really makes sense.

    From MS's standpoint, this is very smart move. This deal is exactly what I'd have offered. MS wasn't making any dough from these guys anyways, an since its marginal cost for duplicating the software is nil, the limitation on dropping their price is that they don't want to encourage people to switch just to get the deal. That level is probably close to zero at this point in time: for most organizations, the TCO savings of F/OSS isn't attractive enough to switch once the you factor in sunk costs, conversion/training costs, and short term opportunity costs.

    So, MS walks away with 60K in their pocket per year, which is not much but it is better than zero. They also get the priceless publicity of a high profile organization going F/OSS and giving up.

    It's a natural and, unfortunately, effective competitive strategy in a business where the marginal cost of a product is zero. I expect that as Linux and OpenOffice get better and better we'll be hearing a lot more stories like this.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  15. My students can set up a LAMP in 17 minutes by pogson · · Score: 2, Insightful
    That's 12 minutes to install a CD of Linux and five minutes to install the AMP packages. A typical php script can be installed in ten minutes or so from local files. Time is less for a boot from a live CD which is feasible if the dynamic stuff is stored on the network.

    I typically install LAMP even on desktops so webapps can be run locally. The browser is just another GUI.

    There is no way that other OS should be mentioned on the same page as Linux for web services. Linux wins hands down.

    The folks locked into that other OS are to be pitied. It is not that Windows is wonderful, but that they have been allowed to establish and maintain a monopoly by illegal means. If they were so good they would not have to use illegal means. Look at the "final agreement". They are allowed to set quotas to distributors at the 50% level and servers aren't even covered. They are allowed to punish distributors that ship PCs without Windows. What a sham when DOJ helps the criminals in their wrongdoing.

    --
    A problem is an opportunity http://mrpogson.com
  16. That's because your students are educated by Safety+Cap · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Installing and configuring complex software is not something the average person can do. It takes technical aptitude, knowledge and some experience to get it right.

    Microsoft historically has gone for the easy way out by hiding the complicated functions below a pretty "Click 'OK' to automatically install and configure your firewall" MessageBox, which is fine if you're writing a document, but not so good if you need to tweak out your server for maximum functionality and security.

    You can see this mentality in everything they do. From Visual Studio with it's horrible automatically-generated code, to their AD permissions 'wizard', they are all about one thing: selling widgets. And the number one rule is selling a mass-market product requires convenience over functionality or security.

    LAMP is built for the do-it-yourself/tinkerer crowd, and therefore the average person will never be able to install, configure, or maintain a LAMP environment or application.

    --
    Yeah, right.
  17. Re:Here's how my police use it by HansF · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm not impressed.
    Really, you could automate that much better using web forms.
    If you have to do a mailmerge in word everytime you want to send something out, you're just wasting taxpayers' money.

    You're blaming grandparent for not knowing what he is talking about, but what do you mean with :
    "They also have to save that form data, which could not be done with a web form..."
    Can you kindly explain what's the point of filling out a webform wich can't be saved ?

    --
    --> Insert Funny Sig Here
  18. Re:Here's how my police use it by ShieldW0lf · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Well, I work IT in a law enforcement agency, and so I can speak to that. The parent is right, you don't know what the Hell you're talking about.

    Police use Word to fill in reports, forms, etc. that could definitely not be formatted using Wordpad. They also have to save that form data, which could not be done with a web form or Acrobat Reader.

    This would be trivial to do with a web based application.

    They also use Word to interact with Excel and Access databases. When you're sending out a notification letter to 180 victims in a given county, you better believe it's a helluva lot easier to use Word's mail merge than typing each name individually in Wordpad.

    This would not only be trivial to do with a web application, it would be better suited as a web application.

    And that's just the tip of the iceberg. Trust me, the police not only use Word, but a whole bunch of other software as well. And you should be glad they do.

    Trust me, I'm a carpenter, and you definatly need wood, hammer and nails to fix this problem.

    --
    -1 Uncomfortable Truth
  19. You haven't experienced Sharepoint then... by mgkimsal2 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You know, I used to be the standard-bearer for that argument, but as of OO 1.9x, interoperability with MS is getting pretty damned good. Particularly the word processor.

    I'm late to the thread here, but it seems that most people with the 'OpenOffice is nearly there' argument haven't really seen MS Office being used in medium to large organizations.

    The MS Office integration with the network system (AD/Exchange) and now Sharepoint make the technical menu imitations of OpenOffice nearly irrelevant.

    From a website, I can click a button, open a spreadsheet *in the browser* (not a full browser takeover, just embedded in part of the web page), make changes/updates, then save the document, and it'll save back on the network drive (or wherever it came from) seamlessly. If live realtime document collaboration of any Office doc was able to be embedded in IE already, I wouldn't be surprised.

    MS has moved beyond the reach of OpenOffice for the next few years because they've taken multi-domain integration to the next stage, way ahead of the fragmentation that exists (almost by definition) in the open source world.

    I'm writing this as someone who has pretty much used LAMP for about 9 years, and uses Linux on my desktop daily for the past 3.

    Now, if someone was to take the novell openexchange system and define new protocols such that Firefox/Mozilla could do realtime openoffice document embedding and communication with the openexchange server, throwing in an embedded gaim client using a jabber protocol for good measure, and made this cross platform, that would be a serious contender. I'm afraid that won't happen for a few years, until a bunch of OSS developers get a glimpse of what's going on in the corporate world. Unfortunately, that may *never* happen, as many of them wouldn't get hired in the first place.

    In short, Microsoft is staying ahead of the competition now by offering extremely tight integration among their core products, and it's only going to continue to go down that path. Not saying it's a bad thing - it's really the only way they *can* go, and I think it'll serve them well easily for another 3-5 years. That's about as far as I'll make predictions. :)

  20. Re:Here's how my police use it by YomikoReadman · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Well, I work IT in a law enforcement agency, and so I can speak to that. The parent is right, you don't know what the Hell you're talking about.

    I'll do you one better. Not only am I a cop, but I work in the IT field as well. There's nothing that couldn't be handled using a web forms application, and better than what you can do with any office suite.

    On the topic of software used by police departments, I think some of it has purpose. Training tracking is good, and e-mail is a good tool for inter- and intradepartment memos. If you can't find a better way to do mass mailings other than Word's mail merge, then you need to go back to school. As for Excel and Access databases, please. MySql is a database. SqlServer is a databse. Postgres is a database. Access is a really fancy spreadsheet, and is absolute crap. Please don't give it any credentials by calling it a database.

    Ultimately, from the look of things, you have zero real experience in IT, and need to go spend some time in large scale corporate IT. Once you've done that, take your lessons learned, and apply them to the small scale you're currently working with.
    --
    I have no regrets, this is the only path.
    My whole life has been "UNLIMITED BLADE WORKS"
  21. Don't bleat on about Choice .... by endeavour31 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    /. is really circling the drain regarding enlightned debate.

    It is so tiresome to see everybody screaming about OSS providing freedom to choose software tools - but it is only good when the choice is excersized in favour of Linux. The instant a choice is made to MS (god forbid) the hue and cry appears condemning those regressive bastards as idiots or dupes.

    Don't offer choice if you are pushing an agenda. It is their choice, they tried something different - and it did not work out for them. Lets stop getting the knickers in a twist simply because someone went against the /. orthodoxy.

  22. Re:In other news... by doublem · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Oh, don't be such a prat.

    Yes, yes, your has been modded funny, but I'd like to make a few points.

    The police department in question needs to exchange data with other departments. These departments are largely using Microsoft Office.

    "They only need a text editor with spell check" claims are, to be kind, absurd and ignorant. At the very least they most likely have a host of templates for document creation. I've had some experience with what happens when documents get mangled by changes to the underlying template. Given what I've seen of moving text boxes and munged tables, template problems could easily do things like switch the name of the victim and the suspect, depending on the template.

    They cited costs as a major concern. I'm sure Microsoft gave them some deep discounts in this situation. Hell, they might even be losing money on this, but being able to use this as a case study for their advertising is worth losing some coin. It could very well be far cheaper to go back to Microsoft than to stick with StarOffice.

    Remember, this is about StarOffice, NOT OpenOffice. The cost of the software itself was not Zero plus download time.

    If you take into account having to maintain a library of duplicate templates, document exchange headaches, cleaning up cases where one application totally screwed over a file created in the other office suite and he cost of having to maintain a separate support staff, switching to MS Office suddenly makes a lot of sense. I'm sure a lot of support staff are going to be let go after they switch back.

    --
    "Live Free or Die." Don't like it? Then keep out of the USA
  23. Man bites dog by Jerry · · Score: 2, Insightful

    which is the reverse of normal events, ergo it makes the news. Dittos for the Scottish police wp change.

    Because so many people and businesses are converting to Linux and FOSS it's not news any more, so stories about that movment are rarely published anymore.

    ---
    per capita death rates of Americans in DC and LA are greater than American soldier combat deaths in Iraq, so when are we pulling out of DC or LA?

    --

    Running with Linux for over 20 years!

  24. Re:Corrections by cahiha · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I am a Linux/Unix admin professionaly and I recently went from OpenOffice back to MS-Office. [...] My CV kept causing everyone elses Word to crash, thats a cost I couldn't afford to pay as a jobseeker.

    Professional Linux/UNIX admins would send their resume in PDF, ASCII, or HTML format. Furthermore, no company minimally concerned about security would open resumes sent to them in DOC format because of security concerns. And if a company insists on something they can open in Word, you can always send them RTF. To me, you sound like you are either making this up, or you are simply not very experienced.

    Incidentally, Microsoft Word can crash even on opening Microsoft Word documents, depending on the versions involved. That's another reason not to use Word for resumes.

  25. Staroffice, and others by phorm · · Score: 2, Insightful

    We've used several "office" applications here in schools and I must say this:

    Staroffice was terrible when we brought it in. Hard to use, with incompatability errors and a generally unpleasant interface. For quite awhile it propogated a mindset that anything that wasn't MS Office was frightening

    Openoffice.org on the other hand (and perhaps more modern StarOffice versions), is very nice, better interface, decent (and improving) compatability, etc. Kids picked up Impress faster that I have, and design some *very* kickass presentations with it. The built-in PDF export facility from the document editors is nice too...

    For those that prefer a slightly nicer interface than OO, depending on your version I've found quite a few people enjoyed Abiword as a replacement for the just word component of office.

    Seriously, even as an OSS advocate I really disliked StarOffice, but there were/are better alternatives out there.

  26. Re:Corrections by maw · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You sound like someone who's never had to look for a job.

    --
    You're a suburbanite.
  27. Re:Here's how my police use it by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm holding you to this one:

    What's a better way to do mass mailings other than Word's mail merge? Seriously, what is your happy easy solution that's better and everybody loves it?

    And in what way is Access NOT a database? Do you even know what the word "database" means? Hell, Access wouldn't even have to be relational to be a database. (It is relational; but that's not required to be a DB.)

    Sure you're a cop and you work in the IT field, but you're also a open source zealot and it shows.

  28. Re:StarOffice too complex, more so that MS word. by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Maybe, but that doesn't mean OpenOffice doesn't suck. Even the brain-dead can learn to drive a Geo Metro, but Geo Metros still suck. Understand now? Gooood.