Slashdot Mirror
Munich Delays Linux Conversion
It doesn't come easy writes "A short blurb over at The Register reports that Munich has decided to extend the pilot phase of their Linux migration project. One smart move mentioned: Many of their office workers will switch to OpenOffice on Windows first where it is comfortable, easing the transition."
They rolled in a few months ago. Missed the boat a bit there I think.
As far as I understood the speech of Florian Schießl (project leader in Munich) on the LinuxTag 2005 they are using a Debian based solution. So there is no need to figure out how to install Slackware.
Already did. The MS solution was cheaper at the time. Munich still decided on Linux. They want full control over their IT infrastructure in the future, right down the souce code level, something Microsoft can't offer.
Let me try to remember what I heard on the speech of Florian Schießl at the LinuxTag 2005.
User resistance: people like to stay with what they know rather than being pushed to use something unfamiliar.
True. To convince the users they did a sort of "tournee" through all departments and showed them how Linux looks like. And they got some funny feedback like "I didn't expect to see a GUI".
Extensive use of MS Office only features such as VBA or features that work differently in Open Office.
True. One of the biggest problem is a custom installed VBA something installed by a "primadonna". Its a hard job to convince the people to change to something completely new.
Applications using Active-X or other COM controls that are not easily converted to WINE or similar.
I have no details on that, but it could be an issue as well.
Third party software products that are only supported under Windows.
According to Mr. Schießl they contacted all their software vendors who provide specific applications and asked them if a Linux port is available or if they can port it to Linux. The feedback to this action was very little so Munich needs to find new partners that are able to provide Linux apps as well.
What else?
Mr. Schießl pointed out that switching is not that easy since the service that the municipality is offering has to remain "online". People would get a lot annoyed if they couldn't register for a car number plate because the city is switching to Linux. So they have to develop a strategy that does the move, but transparent to the citizen that expects full availability of the services.
One other issue could be that since the Munich solution is based on Debian and Debian did the transition from Woody to Sarge recently that might affect the schedule as well. Maybe there are some dependencies on custom software that need to be adjusted to the new environment now. Even if I think that shouldn't be a big deal we need to keep it in mind.
The patent proposal is that if you attack a given GPL'd project with patents then you lose the right to distribute that product. Not the ability to use it.
Linux is under GPL 2 not GPL 2 or later so that is no issue. Open Office is under the LGPL not the GPL.
Ok looks like you misunderstood what that means if you write a peice of software, patent that peice of software, and then decided to release the software under GPL you cant enforce the patent on people who create derivtive works based on your software... but you can still enforce your patent on people who make a product that that is the same as yours but isnt a derivative work of you GPL'd code.....
:)
for example you write a compression algorithim, patent it and release source code for it under GPL, People can make projects with your compression algo and as long as they release it under gpl its all good... but if some company wants to include you compression algo without making their code subject to the gpl they cant without infringing on you patent
in other words patented software released under the gpl is good
"I reject your reality, and substitute my own" - Adam Savage
I see in the story at The Register that they have various office templates and scripts that they want to port to OpenOffice, yet why waste time removing Office from each machine, then installing OpenOffice, then getting all the scripts and templates to work, then having to recreate things when done again in the Linux environment?
Probably because they'll install OpenOffice before removing MS Office, so they can continue to use their scripts and templates while they get them working in OpenOffice. It's a lot easier to write a new version of your templates if you can see how the old version works with software you have available.
If a peice of software is released under GPL v2 OR later, you can choose to continue to use GPL v2 for the software even after GPL v8 is available.
If the software was released under with an "AND" instead of the "OR" then it would require you to follow future revisions of the GPL (although the AND clause is fairly foggy and it should be better written then that.) If the license said "You must follow the latest revision of the GPL" then you'd obviously have to honor that.
Personally, I prefer the LGPL for most core software such as kernels and even Office packages, but the GPL ain't bad. Commercial vendors don't seem to have a problem working around it.
- It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -