Slashdot Mirror
Vista Licensing Speeds Linux Move
Stephen Samuel writes "Australia's NSW Office of State Revenue is speeding it's transition to a Linux desktop due in part to a lackluster interest in Microsoft's attempt to lock them into the Software Assurance Program, reports LinuxWorld. The agency's CIO and manager of client services both confirmed they would start scoping for a move to a Linux desktop within six months. Manager Pravash Babhoota seemed satisfied with a Linux move in their back office, citing Linux costs as being just over 1/6 the projected cost of a Windows upgrade, while processing doubled."
Ballmer just striped his shorts.
Microsoft is a company hell-bent on self destruction.
I'm as tickled as the next Linux advocate to see a move to my favorite platform (Unix). But now some warning bells are going off in my head and I wonder if "we" are on a collision course with Vista, and Microsoft's thrust (innuendo intended) into Trusted Computing.
What are the possible ramifications, and can the Linux community proactively attenutate? I've read many articles, and many posts about Trusted Computing (this has to be one the more ironic names ever, I can almost hear the Microsoft-Intel juggernaut sniggering from here), but I've never felt completely comfortable with how all of the pieces fit together. Maybe it's time for yet another series of replies to re-educate me.
From past learning I understand TC won't stop Linux from working, and won't stop people from installing and using Linux, nor will it stop entire organizations from converting to Linux. But, what about the "Trusted" relationship to the Microsoft world? An entire organization running Linux would seem open to being completely shut out from a Microsoft shop.
Are there answers to this? Is a future Linux conversion vulnerable to what amounts to a technical shunning by the Microsoft universe? Not only do I need to know for myself, but for counseling others who are considering Linux.
if organizations could just buy the PRODUCT that they want...
Either way, more of a choice in Austraila.
Seems like Microsoft has done a wonderful job of convincing customers that buying Vista is pointless. It's bad enough that existing MS operating systems will likely have the same base functionality of Vista with lower hardware requirements(and possibly higher overall performance). Now this?
In the not too distant "Micro-future"...where a person has to obtain proper M$ licensing from birth...
Seriously though, I wonder what Microsoft is thinking sometimes. It's like they're playing chicken against a cement wall with a tank.
I don't get it.
Sounds like a reasoned decision, and not a surprising one either. Time will tell what really happens when they switch from XP. I think that if you have your own in-house expertise, the TCO will be lower in whatever OS that knowledgebase is best versed in.
This group has time to ensure that they are versed in the Linux OS Desktop environment before they switch, so I'm betting that they have a smooth-ish transition.
Support NYCountryLawyer RIAA vs People
Call me sarcastic, but I can see the world not trusting MS systems in the future... if Vista performs as well as IE has, perhaps the divide will be a good thing in the eyes of those who have jumped off the MS ship before it sinks... Maybe that is harsh, but MS does seem to be working hard to make itself irrelevent in ways that will not be fully understood for years...
Support NYCountryLawyer RIAA vs People
"As soon as support ends for XP, we will look at moving to Linux [desktops]," Babhoota said, adding the back-end switch to open source had cost 17 percent of what a proprietary upgrade had been costed at, with the agency doubling the amount of business it processed in the same 12-month period.
Whither now the Yankee group with their magic statistics and Excel sheets which show that in fact Babhoota real TCO is over fives times what it would have been if he'd switched to Server 2003, with a shiny new fade in comboboxes.
May the Maths Be with you!
First a US state governmentswitches to OpenDocument, now an Australian gov't. looks to Linux.
watch out Bill, they're coming for you
MUUAAHHH
Ignorance is not a crime; neither should it be a way of life
Congress control $ = inmates run the asylum
From TFA: '"As soon as support ends for XP, we will look at moving to Linux [desktops]," Babhoota said'
Babhoota also says in the article that going from NT4 to XP was sensible because they waited long enough that prices dropped, and support increased. I don't see any difference in that case and the one I quoted above. Once XP support terminates, Vista's pricing will have decreased from initial launch, and it's support will obviously increase as well.
But hey, more migration to Linux makes me smile. 2006, the year of Linux on the desktop!!(??)
The great thing about governments is that they tend to make the law. Suppose Microsoft's attempts to lock people into their own software start to get in the way of governments using other software they believe to be better, whether in features, reliability, cost, or whatever; it doesn't really matter why. It's a pretty safe bet that the fairly direct result would be legislation making that sort of lock-in explicitly anti-competitive, followed quickly by a nasty lawsuit.
The one group in any country that Microsoft and their commercial partners can't afford to piss off is the government. Not only are they a major potential source of income in their own right, they are also a powerful ally (witness the DMCA in the US and similar legislation elsewhere). Oh, and they also have the last laugh -- always.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
It is the same as companies that hire someone. Company A has no benefits, so $10 per hour is $10 per hour (well, forget FICA, imagine this as an independent contractor). Company B has benefits, so $10 per hour is really $13. Linux is like Company A, and a Linux solution compared to a Windows solution may be the same price, but definately not the same cost.
Click here or here.
"Babhoota said the agency had already successfully bedded down open source on its back-end, running its Oracle 9i and 10g core databases and assorted other transactional applications over Citrix on Dell-based clusters and had guarantees of open source support from key enterprise applications vendors."
What is open source about Oracle and Citrix? Sure you can run Oracle on an open OS, but that's not really an open solution. And Citrix?? How does that involve open source at all?
Maybe I am ignorant, but this makes no sense based on what I know about the products they list.
-Lod
You assume the public feel compelled to "trust" Microsoft. In fact, Microsoft has become the company that everyone loves to hate. They haven't released a major offering in years, and continue to depend upon new computer purchases as its main source of OS revenue (i.e. highly discounted). Meanwhile, you've got a public tired of the lock-in -- espeically when it serves no purpose other than to extract more of their hard-earned dollars. And I haven't even mentioned the lackluster attempts at beefing up security.
Meanwhile, Apple seems to be gaining market share -- based on what? A freakin' MP3 player! "Gee", folks wonder, "Are all Apple products this good?"
And last but not least, there's Microsoft's crown jewel -- Office. Who has $400 to spend on an office suite when Open Office is delivering the same value for FREE?
Which brings me back to the origainal point --- Microsoft wants us to trust them. What have they done to earn that trust?
Sure you have the trusted computing iniative, but if corparations and governments start to jump ship based on Vista and Microsoft's attempts to force people into using it, then the end result is going to be demand for computers without TC built in. You'll see this especially if a government agency adopts a position counter to TC. If a company is producing a computer with TC built in and one with out for a government, then they most likely sell it to consumers that want it. If, for example, the IRS goes against TC and Vista, and opts for Linux, then you'll see a lot of accounts start to run a linux desktop with a lot of commercial software going for it. The best thing that could happen would be if California adopted Linux as a desktop. With the world's 7th largest economy, a lot of vendors would start to produce for Linux.
The views expressed are mine own and do not express the views of my employer.
if oly they'd donate 1% of the savings back to the projects they'd be doing themselves a majour favour and eveyone else too.
Your CPU is not doing anything else, at least do something.
"Babhoota said the agency had already successfully bedded down open source on its back-end, running its Oracle 9i and 10g core databases" Oracle??? Talk about hypocrisy. How much $$$ would they save getting away from that "proprietary" software? "While the back-end migration consisted of moving off heavier Unix- and Solaris-based operating systems running on Sun hardware..." LOL! So they moved from Unix/Solaris to "open source" and not from Windows to "open source". Oooook.
And why should "Trusted Computing" be a problem for NSW? They (presumably) will have their needed applications running on *BSD/Linux, they'll use a standard format for exchanging documents with citizens (or offer several formats). If Microsoft et al is stupid enough to try hindering citicens from reading those documents on Windows, Microsoft will be in trouble.
So, the company agrees and begins to move forward. To my dismay, they put in Citrix, and proceed to replace workstations with Winterms! So, they spent a fortune replacing workstations, instead of just replacing the OS with Linux and featuring new workstations purchased without any OS.
Management types looked at the skyrocketed costs and went back to the original documentation. They actually tried to blame Linux for the costs. The board report reflected this, even though no Linux was installed. Once this was discovered, to save face, they started buying Linterms (still expensive, still replacing workstation, still with 3 year depreciation and replacement cycle).
So, I hear of companies complaining about Linux costs and have to take it with a grain of salt because I know that many people have their numbers inflated or do not really realize what they have. For example, a company buys a Linux box running Oracle for a 25-Windows-workstation network. They classify all the workstations and Oracle, the whole kit and kaboodle, as a Linux project. All associated expenses become Linux's fault, even though the Linux costs were low or none.
Click here or here.
Similarly the Massachusetts Technology Leadership Council on the OpenDocument format mentioned the "cost of a Windows upgrade" if they wanted to upgrade to the next Office version instead of using something that supported an open format. They said that:
Bold mine. I would like to point out for background info that they said they are running mostly Win2k and Office 2003, and that they wanted to state "vehemently" that they didn't want cost to be made into an issue.
Another nice feature of an enterprise Linux install is letting employees take home OS install CDs without even thinking about licensing. Sure, MS relies on piracy to spread Windows across org boundaries, jumping through homes to consolidate the installed base their monopoly leverages into proprietary lockin. But Linux can do that, too, without forcing committment to a vendor or requiring licensing overhead at all.
--
make install -not war
What do you fear? Linux already support Trusted Computing. Anyone can start using it now! Microsoft is still at least a year behind.
:wq
Software Assurance Program = SAP
RTFA again for the best results.
From past learning I understand TC won't stop Linux from working, and won't stop people from installing and using Linux, nor will it stop entire organizations from converting to Linux. But, what about the "Trusted" relationship to the Microsoft world? An entire organization running Linux would seem open to being completely shut out from a Microsoft shop.
It'll be the other way around. In the past years, we had to convince a lot of people, that it is a bad idea to create documents in a propitary file format like MS Word or MS PowerPoint. That was pretty tough and not always successful.
This time, people (not content providers at the first place) will understand pretty easily, that it is absolutely stupid to create documents/files which are only readable at a TC plattform. Mainly, because they learn that just a few computers will be able to open that file but also, because there was a huge media coverage about the disadvantages of all the TC efforts.
TC has a very bad standing in the public opinion, which is not true for the problem of "propitary file formats". I think, even that will change.
I agree. Governments should buy the product they want, but what distribution stands a chance here? Slashdotters, let's speculate for a second on this. I would have speculated but I do not know what software is used in revenue operations.
No, its a 'mareketing phrase'. Its not designed to be accurate, but to appeal to the 'average joe' and make him feel good.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Most US corporations have executive portfolios with M$ stock, and therefore resist anything that threatens their personal wealth. Unless Linux is less than 1/10 the TCO of Windows, it will take a generation before Windows is gone. Gone it will be, but how soon? I expect to be fighting for open source until the day I die. Governments flip/flop just like all politicians.
Software freedom...I love it!
another article saying that they aren't really switching to Linux because MS made them a sweet sweet sweet deal? So many stories of big corporations switching to linux ending up being schemes to get licensing deals from MS...
I'd have to say it is the absurd requirements to run the OS alone; not the total lack of features. I mean seriously what are they thinking? People shouldn't need multiple GHz, gigabytes of ram, harddrives the size of buses, and videocards with 128MB of ram just to make the OS pretty. Scaling be damned, its ridiculous.
IT managers are looking at it like this, $200+ for a new CPU, $120 for a Mobo, $500 for the video card, $200 for the 2GB of ram, and $200 for harddrives just to run an OS that will be outdated compared to its alternatives? Thats outright stupid.
how long till we all throwtogether an infomercial showing the facts about "trusted computing"
Bologna. Nonsense. Most people do not hate Microsoft. Many people that are tech savvy don't like Microsoft, and some of those actually hate Microsoft. But overall, these groups to not constitute "most people".
"Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
I, for one, welcome our new overlord Tux.
:)
Thank you Microsoft, as you push more and more customers away, hardware manufacturers will be providing more and more support for open-source driver development - unhindered by DRM, even!
I used to be a Microsoft fanatic. Hell, I used to WORK for Microsoft! While I was no stranger to Linux (I ran it back when it was just a floppy-based installation and if you wanted X you had to FTP and compile it yourself) my job obviously required the use of Windows (Duh, working for Satan, you have to use his OS). When I moved on during the dot-com boom thinking that other tech companies' stock options would fare better (STUPID decision on my part. I worked for two dot-coms who tanked) I quit running Linux for a while. It wasn't until Microsoft began to outright attack their own customers (Suing college students for reselling unopened software after Microsoft refused to honor their unconditional 30-day money-back guarantee, suing customers who resell used but retired software license, and hell, even suing customers when they choose competitors' products) that I began to look seriously at Linux again, and when I began testing various distros last year I was shocked awed at how much and how quickly is matured. I use Linux 99.9% of the time now. I only use Windows to pull photos off of my cellphone, and to play an occasional game of Return to Castle Wolfenstein.
I still consider Windows to be an excellent tool for most average users, but I have been moving more toward recommending Linux to non-gamers. OOo has matured, and while its file I/O still sucks, it is usable for 99% of users, and what's more, when they come home to {write term papers/draft business plans/write proposals/edit small flyers} Linux and OOo won't hinder them in the least, and most user-friendly commercial distros of Linux are under $100, and to get the equivalent amount and calibur of software for Windows would be anywhere from $20K on up.
Microsoft you're shooting yourselves in the foot, and with every suit you file against a customer choosing a competitor's product, you're gaining bad press and driving thousands more away. With every bit you tighten the noose on your licensing scheme, you're driving more and more schools, municipalities, and large corporations away from your product line entirely, from desktops to workstations to servers.
Keep it up, and you'll go the way of SCO in a few years.
I would see this rather as Microsoft shutting itself out from the rest of the world. If interacting with Microsofts products is even harder than today it will force a serious choice, use only Microsoft software or migrate away to something a tad more open. Mind you it doesnt have to be Linux, it can just as well be anything else. The most important thing is what you run in your backoffice. If your backoffice is tied to Microsofts products then your entire organisation is locked too.
I have a hard time imaging Microsoft shutting out the entire world. At most they can tie their own products together a bit more but most customers see that as a disadvantage. Most money spent is spent on getting various legacy and new systems working together. Getting yourself into a system that makes it even harder than today to interact is not what any sane organisation would do.
HTTP/1.1 400
I get very excited when I read these governmental switching stories. Governments are the only real business users that can effectively mandate file-formats and interoperability standards. Businesses will follow because they must.
Even in the US, I hear of companies switching whole departments over to OSS on Windows (namely openoffice). These are actually large companies switching over whole departments in regional offices.
I think that there is a network-effect of these early adopters. If there are enough of them that mandate that you have open-office installed, then (at some point near or just less than ~50%) there will be a sea-change of business that will switch over in one fell swoop. If it turns out that it is a business requirement that you use and have training for open-office, then people will wonder why they are voluntarily paying for Microsoft Office for no good reason. (Legacy docs in MSOffice is not a good enough reason to stay - support for these docs in OpenOffice will be demanded and feverishly worked on if enough enough businesses want it)
Once the slide starts, it will be a brutal few years for Microsoft Office.
TCO studies never capture the real costs of either a switch to Linux from Windows or a Windows upgrade. They invariably take the easy route, comparing only OS licensing costs, sysadmin/support salary, and training issues. They aren't "studies" in the academic sense, since the data they study are chosen to achieve a particular outcome.
In my practical experience as a Linux/Unix sysadmin and MCSE, the things they miss are:
Against all the benefits of not having to hassle with licensing there is a balance, the ability to point the finger of blame at a vendor. With free software, all the blame goes to the internal champion of the software, usually the sysadmin.
Raise your children as if you were teaching them to raise your grandchildren, because you are.
An entire organization running Linux would seem open to being completely shut out from a Microsoft shop.
... shut"), this is bad how?
Irony in the phrasing aside ("open to being
Bear in mind, the converse is more likely to be true. Windows will only run "trusted" (by whom?) apps that are signed with a certificate bought from Microsoft, Linux will happily run anything that the user trusts enough to install. Microsoft users will find themselves shut into a jail of their (or rather, Microsoft's) own choosing.
-- Alastair
Trusted Computing (this has to be one the more ironic names ever,
No, people are just spelling it wrong. It's really Trussed Computing -- you know, like how you lace up a turkey before putting it into the oven.
-- Alastair
Meanwhile, Apple seems to be gaining market share -- based on what? A freakin' MP3 player! "Gee", folks wonder, "Are all Apple products this good?
Really? Where are the statistics? I'm not saying you are wrong, but I would like to see proof.
Personally I would bet that Apple has gained mind share from the iPod, but that has translated into only marginal market share increases for theirr OS. Why? Because PC's are still really cheap, and people need Microsoft office at home to be compatible with work.
But I am only pulling crap out of my ass, just like you.
Download my free songs!
A huge amount is riding on Vista, not just for Microsoft but all through the IT industry right down to the little guy in China who helps make circuit boards. They all want a piece of what they hope will be frenzied upgrade action and plenty of businesses will suffer badly if they don't get it.
There will be huge pressure on Microsoft to make Vista work, if necessarily fairly brutally - stick with WinXP and find your security expectations downgraded, monthly updates increasingly scarecrow and difficulties soon arising accessing certain websites or playing certain media, etc, etc. We'll all be told that only Vista can guarantee proper security "for your own good" or whatever.
It's great to see Linux making inroads, but they are still fairly small and tentative. These guys, after all, are only scoping out Linux, not installing it. Linux still needs some big, influential and well-respected folks to get behind it of the kind Joe Sixpack will admire. Apple has Steve Jobs and the ipod, two items of superb natural showmanship anyone can relate to. What does Linux have? The Eric S. Raymond Opensaucemanship Memorial Lecture is no substitute. Dell will want a bit more excitement before they start shipping Linux boxes en masse.
Las qué passoun
tournoun pas maï
D'oh... "Trusted Computing" does will not prevent people from reading "plain" (=created without TC stuff) documents... That would *really* make a migration difficult, wouldn't it?
It will have some effect the other way: Windows users will send documents to the rest of the world, but the rest of the world cannot read them because they run the "wrong" O/S.
Basically, we will be back to the old marketing trick of vendor lock-in, where your data is held hostage not only by a single-application file format, but encryption with laws to boot...
You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.
"citing Linux costs as being just over 1/6 the projected cost of a Windows upgrade, while processing doubled."
Every single Linux move I've read about indicates that costs are WAY less than Microsoft and its shills like Enderle and DiDio claim, and that processing power at LEAST doubles.
This is on a par with those companies that move from mainframes to commodity servers - they save MILLIONS and processing power is at least TWO TO FOUR times greater.
Anybody using mainframes for heterogenous processing needs is an idiot. (It might be reasonable for running thousands of copies of a Web server in some cases.)
Anybody using Microsoft is an idiot. Period.
This piece of shit Windows XP I run (along with Mandriva 2005 LE - I need Windows for tech support - but I'm getting real close to killing it anyway) yesterday decided to corrupt its file system so that every time I ran a certain program, it tried to run the MSI installer and install a different program - over and over. Since the MSI installer is "privileged", I couldn't kill its process without being administrator, and I couldn't shut the system down because the installer was in a loop, and I couldn't uninstall the program being installed because it was being installed continuously, and so on and so on.
A perfect storm of shitty Windows design...
I had to hit the power button, boot up, go in as root, run the disk checker to fix the corruption, then uninstall the two programs involved and reinstall them.
Fucking Microsoft crap... There isn't a day goes by without some bullshit like this happening.
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
I guess while everyone is pulling craptoids (versus factoids), I can provide a bit of anecdotal evidence...my parents recently gave me their old Windoze boxen (running 2000) when they upgraded to an iMac. As envious as I was, I was still happy to take their old machine, which now, incidentally, runs Linux!
They were frustrated as hell over continuous problems with stability.
They were initally alarmed that they couldn't open Word and Excel documents using the Apple software, and scoffed at the idea of paying for YaOS (yet another office suite). I d/l and installed OpenOffice. My mom was absolutely stunned at the price.
Every time I post a comment, I get THIS horseshit:
"No discussion or comments found for this request. To create your own discussion, please use journals."
TRY, please, to get your fucking site working properly.
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
Bologna. Nonsense. Most people do not hate Microsoft. Many people that are tech savvy don't like Microsoft, and some of those actually hate Microsoft. But overall, these groups to not constitute "most people".
The average Joe does not hate Microsoft like most Slashdotters seem to. But of those average users, how many aren't frustrated in some way by Microsoft or their products? I would bet most of them. Eventually they will decide that it's time to try something new because of it.
Governments fuck up everything they touch. EVERYTHING is cronicly overbudget, over burdenned by bueacracy, and always late. They create stupid rules. People more concerned with their own asses then the budget or accomplishing a goal sit around in big commities trying to figure out how to make sure that WHEN shit fucks up they aren't the ones that are going to get burned for it.
Stories about governments switching to Linux is OK, but it's stupid. Even big corporations switching to Linux is fairly pointless except for the capital it generates for GPL-software-creating companies like Redhat and Novell.
If you want stories about Linux installations cronically going overbudget, being insecure, and just being general shit.. why then the government is great for that. Absolutely wonderfull. Gives GREAT impressions.
Instead of using market demand and market forces to spread Linux you think FORCING open formats down people's throat is going to do it instead? It's just stupid... what you are going to end up with is shit like:
"Fucking government contract, I have to use this shitty open format crap and it doesn't work with jack shit that I use. Such a pain in the ass." comming out of businesses left and right.
I don't know if you noticed it or not, but people generally don't like being forced to do something that they otherwise wouldn't do. That's the point of the story for this article.. that people don't like those fuckers at Microsoft forcing the 'software assurance' crap down on them, so they are turning to Linux.
What matters now in the USA for Linux adoption is SMALL BUSINESS. The vast majority of work, workers, and money in the US economy passes thru small businesses. That is the majority of stuff that gets done is with companies of around or less then 200-400 people. Big corporations and the stock market get top billing in the news and gets lots of attention, and that's because they have lots of capitol to mess around with, but generally they are so locked into their business proccess that switching from Linux to Windows is increadably difficult and expensive lots of the time.
I repeat. What matters is small business. They have to want to use Linux because using Linux and free software gives them a competative ADVANTAGE over their contemporaries.
The goal is to streamline the business, reduce costs in such a way that they put their rivals out of business or eventually buy them out.
When they find out that by using Linux they can reduce the cost of business and reduce productivity lost from dealing with complex licensing issues and downtime.. then that when we will see dramatic improvements in Linux adoption.
Becuase then those small companies drive their rivals out of business or buy them out, then they become BIG companies. Big companies with money to spend on developement and buy applications for the Linux platform instead of the Windows one.
That's why Windows is so much bigger now.. because the current crop of middle and big companies grew up using Microsoft products. Windows grew up, computers grew up, as these companies grew up.
It didn't have jack shit to do with the government and widespread Linux adoption won't have much to do with the government either. Stop looking for the government to solve your problems or create situations that you like... that's not what they are for. When they try to do that they just fuck shit up because they could care less about money or efficiency or anything like that. They generally just make things worse.
Look at the good that IBM did for Linux's marketability. They accomplished more in a couple years in terms of linux adoption then the US government could do in a decade.
Or SAP, (snicker) seems like M$ is one of those problems that fixes it's self...now if only I could get the admins at my college to use *nix
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
Vista will be released and everyone is going to migrate to Linux. I'm sure Microsoft is shaking in their boots.
Listen people, only Mexican corporations will migrated to Linux based on licensing costs. The rest of the world doesn't give shit.
Wherever you look, companies are moving to Linux and saving tons of money in the process. The saving are mostly in licensing fees, cost for software, anti-virus/spyware/adware software costs, and administration and security related costs. At least for our offices the move to Linux was one of the best decisions that we've ever made.
Most "average Joe" users don't nit-pick like Slashdotters. So, no, most "average Joe" users are not frustrated in any significant way by Microsoft.
people need Microsoft office
Hmmm, let's see. OS X comes with Office*! Windows comes with the poor Word substitute, Wordpad. For the average buyer, OS X should be the clear winner in this regard.
And, why do people need Office? I can see the word processor and spreadsheet might be handy in certain fields, but they certainly aren't needed by every business and are definitely not needed by the home user.
* You still have to pay for it of course.
I'm not sure I want to refer to myself as a SAP...
Are you serious? Moste people don't even know they're being locked in. Many wouldn't even care if the did know. Governments are known for their complete lack of any sense of reality, especially when it comes to technology. They are also hardly immune to the lure of money. I think the fact that most governments still run on Microsoft, and the underwhelming results of Microsoft being convicted aptly demonstrate that.
How you can ever hope to rely on governments to keep Microsoft in check is completely beyond me.
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
Coming out of MS CEO's office: "I'm going to f**king kill LINUX!!!!"
I'm convinced of this. Management at many companies likes to spend money, because to them it feels like an "investment." If they "invest" 200,000 dollars into OS purchases, there is a lot more percieved value than investing 0 dollars into OS purchases.
The famous economics example is the fur coat markup. A New York boutique got a lucky closeout and tried to pass that on to their customers. So they marked a rack full of fur coats at 400 dollars. Unfortunately none of these sold. So they shifted gears and marked the fur coats up to 2,000 dollars. Now they quickly sold out. Apparently, nobody wanted a cheap fur coat and everyone wanted a nice fur coat. And because none of these people knew how to judge a fur coat, the only thing they had to go on was the price.
The same thing is true of management at some companies and technology purchases. Office is 4x as expensive as Star Office, and infinitely more expensive as Open Office, so it must be substantially better. Right? Why cheap out on technology purchases when you are investing in your infrastructure and you have no idea what you're doing? Sign the big check... that will assure smooth sailing down the road.
Of course, down the road THEIR boss looks at that big check and wonders where all of that money went. And their infrastructure is unable to keep up with things so they feel the need to hire even more expensive consultants from IBM at 300 dollars an hour, and pour even more money into the most expensive solution they can find. If the 200,000 dollar NT webserver needs rebooting weekly, the solution must be the 400,000 dollar Win 2K webserver using all HP parts and solutions, right?
Unfortunately, sometimes the most expensive solution is the worst. Frequently in technology more expensive means more chefs in the kitchen, which leads to shoddy cohesion and ultimately shoddy construction. Additionally, the most expensive solutions are from companies that just want the money, and who will simply markup existing packages, overbill for time, and sell you hardware that is built at the cheapest Malasian refurb factories and that is guaranteed to die the moment the consultant steps out of your building with a check.
As a side note, I still find it shocking what I can bill for my time as a computer consultant. For that kind of money, just hire someone competent for your staff full-time. If you don't feel like you can do that, hire an outside consultant to hire someone for you.
The ______ Agenda
yep its tough to create a spreadsheet with a KERNEL , but its not to tough using open office
If you had posted that five years ago, you'd have been right because Linux wasn't quite there yet. Based on your post it looks like you had a bad experience in the early days with Slackware or RedHat, and haven't tried Linux in the last couple of years.
It's ready now. Linux really is ready for the desktop. Sure there are some stragglers (Canon, HP, Asus, ATI) but once Linux hits critical mass - and it's very close now - you will quickly see their tune change and provide great support for open-source drivers.
Most people I know who still run windows have at least a once a month cussing session when they get hosed, and have to haul their borked windows box to the smiling local MS fixit guy for folding money "repair". Not sure if you would call that angry or anoyed with MS, but put it this way, they are not amused in the slightest. if people don't have a tame geek handy who can be suckered into working for free, running MS just costs people cash and aggravation in between a few minutes of medicore performance and use.
If you don't believe this, just go into your nearest whitebox shop and see what the bulk of the repairs are. It's certainly not hardware failure at the top of the list. Now MS has done a remarkable job in marketing so far into keeping people dumbed down that it is 'the computer's" fault things go wrong, but we are at a tipping point now where people by the millions are realising that it's MICROSOFT that's broken. Years past they didn't know any better, but it sure is changing now. Heck, I was in a big chain hardware store yesterday, needed to order a part for a small gas engine tool, when the dude booted his machine to look up the part number I noticed the machine was running the moz browser, NOT IE. I commented to the salesguy, he said "it worked better". Kinda neat. A few years ago this wouldn't have been so, but once large corporations start changing, and those people go home and run that stuff on their home machines, then they tell their friends and family, and etc...well, MS is on the way out sometime, they have PEAKED and are on the downhill now, and longvistahorn will not be saving them. It will take some more time, but there's nothing they can do to stop the changes now, this "most people" person IS getting hip and won't be putting up with their ridiculous rip off buggy stuff for much longer. Might take 5 to 10 more years, but once the big slide happens, watch out, it will go FAST. And the younger geeks entering the IT workforce will be pushing this now, they just aren't going to be standing for running ancient expensive and bogus crap when they KNOW there's better.
I for one just got tired Windows. As more and more of what I do with my computer is web based and doesn't require Windows, I decided to throw in a new hard drive and install Ubuntu. Now Windows is used for games and a few apps that I need to run from time to time. As alternatives like Linux mature, Microsoft is going to have its hands full keeping customers who want to cut costs and get more out of their computers. Licensing deals that drive customers away are not going to help them in the long run.
To the making of books there is no end, so let's get started
When we are self-sufficient through implants, there is no society at all. A posthuman needs no money concept.
What I fear is hardware that requires that in order to be executed, binaries be digitally singed. I fear that the encryption keys needed to sign code such that it may be executed will be licenced and expensive. I fear that MS may try and sidestep the challenge posed by free software by changing the platform so that Linux and other competitor code simply cannot run.
The TPM code for linux that you mention works similarly, but allows you to choose your own encryption keys. As such it becomes a potentially useful tool to prevent execution of unauthorised code.
But only if we, the users, control the keys. I can't see that happening. That's the thing to fear.
Don't let THEM immanentize the Eschaton!
Sadly, with these sorts of shifts human nature is to moan about the shift to Linux. In the organisations which make the switch, the thousands of non-techies affected will blame every new problem they have on the switch to Linux. In every other department that has not switched, nobody will complain because they are already used to the problems they have with Windows and habitually work around them. And the new Linux-users won't experience the positive side of the switch to Linux as greatly as us techies because they are already used to the Microsoft way.
With any change, there is a pain, and that pain is normally blamed on the technology you're changing to.
I have respect for what you are saying but there are a few points we disagree on.
1) Your contention: Small business and market forces will always choose the best way.
My rebuttal: When the small businesses of yesteryear chose Microsoft (and are now mid-to-large businesses), they did so because Microsoft and the market incented them to. This will not change. When there is a monopoly player, by definition they have ultimate pricing power in a sector - by definition then markets favor monopolies.
2) You contend: Governments are inefficient, therefore they are bad adopters of open source.
I rebut: Governments _are_ inefficient, no beef with you there. Here's the rub though - they are the only channel for tasks that are inherently social that can't be achieved by market forces. If there is no money to be made by a certain endeavor that ensures the public good, then the government _has_ to do it. . . especially if the alternative is public harm. Ensuring the competitive marketplace is _precisely_ one of those tasks. By dictating that everyone use a standard, open format, you encourage competition in the word-processing market and you give consumers choice. . . voila, you are doing a very pro-freemarket thing.
3) You contend: The government is unneccessary and only screws things up.
I rebut: Governments are _great_ at screwing things up. . . we agree there. But what is the alternative? Try living in a chaotic country via mob rule -- it is a truly terrible thing. (Hobbes described life without government as "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short"). There will always be someone who will try to dominate you if there is no governmental buffer. At least with a government, you have some promises made to you and some hand in how you are treated. Your task should be to make that government as just and favorable to you as possible (if you are lucky enough to live in a democracy) rather than try to get rid of it entirely and be left with capricious power-hungry whims of the most powerful arch-citizens at your throat.
And I say Windows is not and never has been user friendly. I am a UNIX and Linux user, and whenever I have to use Windows,it becomes as intuitive and friendly as a lefthanded bobcat.
You are a narrow minded moron. Just because you know Windows and find it intuitive doesn't make it intuitive tosomeone who has never used a computer.
Infuriate left and right
"Australia's NSW Office of State Revenue is speeding it's transition to a Linux desktop due..."
:)
"It's" should be replaced with "its."
The simple good query "it's its" will clear this right up.
I'm actually looking forward to the new version of Windows and the multiple licenses available for people of all shapes and sizes! Linux is just too damn time consuming.
believing the big bang requires a certain amount of supernatural faith
OK, I am bait.
Give me one reason why Microsoft should stick with IE? I can give you one to jump ship for. IE = broken HTML. Rather than fix it just use firefox and add the plugins they need.
Microsoft cuts costs in other areas. why not with the development of IE, use a free open source browser. Microsoft now does all the license validation for all products in India via a subcontractor. Things are getting tight and they have to pinch every penny.
Your Average Joe
Please stop attacking my blog with that script. It's actually sending emails out to 4 addresses. That's very annoying.
The comment wasn't mine. Someone posted it, and added my signature at it (to a different instance than the one in the link in your automated blogcomment, though).
They did this to redirect your wrath at me. It wasn't even me. You've been duped into attacking the wrong person. I see you changing your script. Please stop.
--
Brought to you by Drool... You're tasting it now!
Generated by SlashdotRndSig via GreaseMonkey
-Clio
Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
Just when Linux gets usable (Ubuntu) Microsoft goes and does something stupid like that. I guess the MPAA just gave Linux 50% of Microsoft's market share.
You are neglecting some very important details, however. IF YOU RTFBP (Read The Fucking Blog Post), you will see that I begin it by saying, "This came from an anonymous slashdot comment."
I was reposting it, because I thought it was brilliant.
That doesn't mean I'm the one who originally said it.
I don't say things as AC because, unlike some people, I have balls.
(No, that page isn't mine either, but maybe it will entertain you enough to leave me alone. His Christopher Reeve page is hilarious; I highly reccommend it.)
--
Karma: Negative (mostly from not giving a fuck)
Generated by SlashdotRndSig via GreaseMonkey
-Clio
Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
I use OO daily, and I agree that v.2.0 is pretty nice, but it is not even close to MS Office! I just can't escape Visio for my tech writing tasks (I know, it wasn't produced by MS, but it is definitely a part of office now), and both the PowerPoint and Excel clones in OO have a long way to go before they are Office's peers. It would actually be sort of scary if they were, office has been in development for quite a while longer than OO.
9 448,00.html?mod=todays_us_page_one (sorry, requires subscription)
:-)
I don't think Microsoft's attempts at security are lackluster, they're taking security really seriously. Check out the hard stats: http://blogs.zdnet.com/Ou/index.php?p=103
That's also the reason they haven't released a new OS in awhile. Check out this discussion of their new development process, which mentions that they had to scrap a lot of code that was going to end up in Vista to improve reliability: http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB11274368032834
On the other hand, IE is falling WAY behind in the features department. They really need to do something to attract more advanced users.
I enjoy developing apps for Linux and Gnome, and I simply couldn't switch back to Windows now after getting so used to the Linux development environment and its broad capabilities. However, I think people need to be fair with Microsoft. If MS weren't around, I highly doubt that a PC (or 7) would be in every modern home, so we'd all be worse off.
Well, I guess Apple could have provided the same (or probably better) ease of use, but competition is always good.
The Office of State Revenue is part of the fucking Government.
If you send them a document they can't read they will ignore it and the consequences (refiling fees, late penalties, etc.) will come back on you.
You think they will give a shit that you want to use a TCP program? Their response will be "Provide it in readable form or pay the penalties."
I'm guessing that wasn't on their radar screen...
Anyone else see the headline and read it as Vista Licensing Speeds Linux Movie ?
More and more corporations are discovering that they can save thousands of dollars in licensing fees, costs for software and anti-virus/spyware programs, etc. by switching to Linux. Our company has already saved several thousand dollars and we are finally having a secure and stable system that can be administered very easily. With Linux my job went from hell to heaven and everyone prefers the various Linux software packages e.g. OpenOffice to the previous Windows versions. Most of our partners, even many suppliers, have switched to Linux already.
Regardless of whether any given person hates Microsoft, or merely dislikes them, or doesn't even know that they exist (and think the Windows is "the computer" and IE "the Internet"), you would be rather hard pressed to find a person outside of Redmond that actually feels the warm fuzzies for Microsoft. And, judging from people like Mini-Microsoft, those people seem to grow fewer even inside Redmond.
Ummm... it's got the perdy blue e?
/shrug. Stupid Cnet.
To be honest, I couldn't think of any good reasons when I wrote my response earlier, but obviously they're still planning on using it... they must have their reasons...
There is one FireFox frustration I do have... certain news sites are obviously programmed for that very broken HTML you speak of above.
Deja Vu
n. 1. The sensation that you've read this very article before.
But the suits love Billy G. he's microsoft's mealticket. As long as he can keep MS software as the ONLY way to bank, get govt docs, communicate with large corporations, and shut everybody else out, he'll have a steady sorce of income. MS could afford to GIVE the govt their products because if it's required to do business they can charge the middle men anything they want for it!!!
This is a standard spiel copy and pasted in reply to linux issues. Just search around for it I'm sure you'll find an instance. In other words this is total propaganda ... not even worth discussing.
How dumb do they think we are?
Bitter and proud of it.
Sounds to me like you just fear the (slim) possibility of having to pay for software...
What's entertaining is that lots of people here think they'll be any /less/ frustrated by Linux.
It's just possible it might having something to do with the way IE is an extensively re-used shared component and Firefox is just a standalone application.
Firefox is not a drop-in replacement for IE, for perfectly valid technical reasons. For exactly the same reasons, Firefox is not a drop-in replacement for OS X's WebCore, or KDE's khtml. Firefox does not have the functionality or featureset to replace IE without extensive work (which could just as easily be used making IE better).
IE IS NOT A STANDALONE APPLICATION, IT IS A SET OF SHARED COMPONENTS. Why, nearly a decade after implementation and several other platforms copying the design, do so many people still have difficult grasping this simple concept ?
Hmmm, how can this guy be 31 and still available?
First, people aren't "idiots" because they took the word of their vendor and ran what came pre installed on their machines, thinking innocently that "the experts", the MS billionaires and whomever they bought their hardware from provided them with a quality product. That makes them conned, but that's something that can happen to anyone regardless of IQ. So the nasty inference is unwarranted. You don't blame the consumer if they get a hardware product and it continually fails, yet with a software product that fails for most people who aren't IT professionals it's THEIR fault? Says who, you? HAHAHAHA! You deny that most people who have gotten windows installs HAVEN'T been compromised? What are all these thousands of articles over the years talking about then? What's this huge after market industry devoted to trying to secure and fix what MS ships? an illusion? No, YOU face reality and just skip the FUD, windows causes extreme problems for people the way it is, even with firewalls and antivirus products installed, millions of just regular folks still get nailed. Even many large shops WITH professions sysadmins get compromised. Or do you deny that as well because your personal experience is different?
/. readership has. and years past, not much in the way of any alternatives, but NOW? It's getting there, look back even two or three years ago, now do an extrapolation exercise. You honestly see FOSS going back downhill and just going away to insignifigance and MS going back up?
The trend for FOSS in general is going up. People are switching. Corporations are switching. It's slow, but plotted on a graph the indication is UP. it is not mere some small thousands of people like it was maybe 5 to 10 years ago, it's now untold millions around the planet, a not-insignifcant number, and word of mouth and political and raw economic factors that are forcing it to happen faster and faster now. Governmental agencies are switching. Many nations are openly embracing FOSS and it will be at an accelerated rate the longer this continues. Look to some of the new developing nations that look to be powerhouses in the future, like Brazil, they are in complete open revolt against MS and that entire socio/economic culture of expensive vendor lock in to insecure marginally performing products. Look at India where a plethora of industry and governmental officials are calling for a change, heck, look all over, every day another big company switching, another political action to try and force a governmental switch. People aren't doing this because it's just something to do, they are doing it because they want to switch from expensive and unsatisfactory to cheaper freer and more useful. This doesn't make them idiots, it makes them smart and aware.
Like I said, it will take some more years,note the word *years*, but it's easy to see it happening and what the trends are. And just because your *personal* microcosm anecdotal is favorable, my post was in *generalities* and macro trends, so changing the subject, while an obvious elementary debate 101 tactic, isn't any sort of reasonable or logical retort. I repeat, and this is an experiment anyone may try, go to your nearest whitebox shops, and see what they make the most money on with "computer repairs". It's cleaning up windows installations after it's gotten compromised. that's it, and you know it. I'm sure there are several people reading this who own and run whitebox shops, let them speak on this, what makes them money right now. As geeks, how many of us have had to 'fix" friends and families computers, where usually what is broken is *windows*. I know I have, you probably have, I would wager something like 99% of
The people who have this happen to them several times in a row are getting hip. They are not IT professionals, nor should they have to be just to use a machine. Yes, some care and training and awareness is necessary to use any computer/OS/applications package, but even the dullest of the non sharp are finally re
"On the other hand Microsoft ensures that their software is so bloated that people will require a new computer every couple of years."
Yeah. Like Linux would have given us several Gb HD's, 2+Ghz processors, and SLI Video Cards that make your eyes bleed.
Leave it to Slashdot to turn a positive into a negative just to slam MS.
Um...yeah, that's what I'm talking about. We won't be human.
I just decided to read up on Trusted Computing. What happens if I need to replace some hardware, say my motherboard which I have done three times in the past year (unrelated note: always get the four year extended warranty with Dells). Does all of my "trusted" software become unreadable? Screw that, I will never buy TC anything if thats the case.
MS does seem to be working hard to make itself irrelevent in ways that will not be fully understood for years...
And history repeats itself. Remember IBM, when they were big and bad? Compaq legally reverse engineered their BIOS, and started making clones. And the clones were outselling the genuine IBMs. So, IBM create a new standard called "PS/2".
It was bigger, badder, and meaner than "ISA" (Industry Standard Architecture) and it was wholly owned by IBM. They owned the roost, they set the standards, and everybody would drop their "open" options for the closed one, and IBM would be kazillions of bucks.
But, it didn't work. People didn't buy it. Microsoft is very clearly in danger of repeating that very same mistake, and I'm quite sure they are aware of that fact. They may be vile, evil, and short-sighted, but they aren't dumb.
Will history repeat itself? News at 11. (2011, that is)
I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
Of course, they could try and make us pay for the encryption keys needed to make that software run. I'd object to that; I mean it's not as if I didn't already pay for the computer. And the software isn't theirs, so why should I pay for it?
But the real rear is that they may refuse to licence the keys to the linux kernel or any GPL software. Or that they may picth the licence costs out of reach of free software projects.
Then, even with you payig my software bills, I still won't be able to run my software on my computer.
Don't let THEM immanentize the Eschaton!
The bluff that if you don't sign NOW, the sky will fall in - has been called, and *remembered*. The OTHER solution will cost more .. has been exposed and remembered. Maybe he has been talking to Bureau of Meteorology(BOM) who is the leading opensource user in Australia - and get more 'hits'and serves more bits than any other govt dept - a major success story, whose IT cost ratios are the most efficient.
.au Oracle and Citrix, like MS, typically cost TRIPLE US licence prices are way expensive downunder. With Citrix, they can stall being frogmarched into an upgrade, and stay securish.
LIke BOM, you slip OpenSource in over time, and wedge other costly products out - over time. In
That Revenue get twice the work done is scary - so whats the new motto - 'Software that hold's up your business'.
M$ loosing market will help someone other than PC users. It will help Nintendo. Sony is having huge economic problems (at least is what I'm reading everywere), and M$ will have them too. Not now, or even in a year but maybe the Revolution 2 will be the only next-next generation console. Except for SEGA going back to hardware :P
Think about a Vista+DRM+TCPA+... user wants to send something to his/her friend that has an old computer with any non TC OS. Suddenly you can't. And it won't be 90% XP users migrating to Vista in a month. So you will be "alone" until you A) have more known people having Vista B) go back to an older Windows or go to another OS. Add your point and tell me if there's any reason to use TC.
All hail our new Windows Fister overlords in 2006!!
Duke nukem 3D with DRM that finally runs on Vista, rendered by Avalon!!
mwaaaaaaah!!
Glory to the Billz0r!!
Yeah. It's kinda funny...
The average users can't configure a VCR or maybe even a microwave oven. Not surprisingly they can't really handle Windows - they can just about get it started, and their apps. So they'll be just as frustrated with Linux.
So much so that if Desktop Linux ever gets popular, and they want to install a fancy "Britney Spears" screensaver, they'd paste and run a test message that's some obfuscated perl that installs a trojan.
Most users send their cars to "professionals" for maintenance AND for adding of 3rd party accessories.
The trouble with Windows or Linux is while most people know that cars need to be refuelled every now and then, most don't seem to run the O/S update stuff regularly. The other trouble with either Windows or Linux Desktops is that a certain bunch of people want to add 3rd party stuff very often, and when they can't figure out how to do it, it's the "manufacturer's" fault (that said computers are supposed to be a lot more extensible than cars).
Of course there are the vast numbers of people driving around with unmaintained bangers that are nearly falling apart and giving problems to everyone else.
yep, sucks. Corruption is endemic all over the planet. Hard to find a non corrupt government.
Anyway, cheer up, perhaps the MIT 100$ laptop will provide the alternative needed for the planets poorer people.
What are the possible ramifications, and can the Linux community proactively attenutate?
Good point. I think our best chance to proactively attenutate would be to leverage our core competancies by utilizing synergy.
(Sorry. Couldn't help myself.)
I guess the time is always right for arbitrary physics references...
Most people do not hate Microsoft.
I hate to agree, but I have to. Most people when their pc starts running slow because unbeknowest to them its infested with spyware will first blame the age of their system and then the manufacturer. All to often I hear: "This old piece of sh*t (Athlon 800Mhz, tons of ram) is too slow to surf the internet with. I need a newer 2-3Ghz system for that!" or "Damn, piece of crap Gateway, I'm gonna get a Dell next time!
Lots of people blame the hardware and not the software. Most don't even know they *have* an OS! Most when asked what OS they're running reply with "I have a dell!" or "Internet Explorer". These same folks don't know what a browser is... "Which browser do you use sir/maam?... Google/Yahoo? Umm... that's not a browser..."
I think alot of folks would actually *hate* MS if they knew what role they actually play in their PC and that it's their insecure browser/OS that resulted in them having to dish out $100 to get their pc fixed/re-imaged or the reason they dished out another $300-$500 to replace an otherwise perfectly fine PC.
Georgia Tech, the leader in Chia(tm) technology.
But being self-sufficient means you can live in outer space with no contact with anyone--this does remove the need for goods and services.
Stop living in the stone age you sad pathetic man. Vista is looking great and you linux zealots have your heads shoved to far up your open source asses to see it. Boohoo, you can't create a product as successful as Windows. Boohoo you have hundreds of retarded distributions. Whatever, go have fun with your command line while I get my work done.
But the concept of money will be vastly different. Perhaps employed in ORPG, but not the fiat system we have today.
"Trusted Computing" means that someone else can trust that your computer will do what they want, no matter what you do.
I'm expecting that, sooner or later, we're going to see viruse running around that encrypt your data so that only the virus writer (if anybody) can decode it -- or you've got 7 days to make a payment and get the key before your important data 'expires'.
Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.