Slashdot Mirror
French Military Police Switches to Firefox
Oslo_the_CKC writes to tell us that French Magazine Linux Pratique recently published an interview with General Brachet of the Gendarmie Nationale. In the interview he discusses why they have moved over 100,000 personnel over to Firefox and Thunderbird (70,000 and 45,000 respectively). This follows on last year's switch to OpenOffice.org so it seems like the French Military Police are enjoying the success of open source.
Giant orange lizard seen marching under the Arch de Triumph
Well, now we know who the loser in the browser war will be.
Honestly, the reason why firefox is the preffered choice is not only because of it's security, robustness, and general workability, but also because it's so damn customizable. Honestly, I can do anything I want on any operating system, if I have my handy dandy firefox.
.. it's pretty sweet.
Anyway, check out this kickass firefox extension that allows users anywhere to chat with other users viewing the same website as them. (It'd be cool to see a few slashdot.org people!) =)
Try the QuickChat extension out
Um, dude how bad is your math? Assuming that they aren't leaving some with IE+Thunderbird or Firefox+OE, 15,000 will be using both.
Another foreign government branch switches to an open source solution. Wow. How about "American corporation XYZ switches N hundred thousand employees to Firefox". That would be news!
Linux Pratique: What are the most important features of Firefox 1.5?
Général Brachet: These features are independent of the version number. The most important things about Firefox are its compliance with W3C standards and its availability on several platforms (Microsoft, Linux and Mac). When the Gendarmerie will deliver application on-line to homeland security organisations and, in the future, to citizens, it will not request the users to use any particular platform or piece of software from specific vendors. Using Firefox or any other Web-standards-compliant browser will be requested, independently of the platform (...)
Linux Pratique : How many seats are going to be deployed, and how long will it take?
Général Brachet : Starting January 1st, 2006, Firefox will be the browser of choice for the Gendarmerie. (...) This migration will impact every PC connected to the Intranet and the Internet, totalling 70,000 seats, before the end of the year 2006. Most of the Web services will be W3C-compliant by then. (...)
Linux Pratique : OpenOffice.org (last year), now Firefox, when will you swich to Linux?
Général Brachet : Thunderbird will be deployed as the only mail client on 45,000 seat in 2006. The idea is to provide every unit with a workstation and have it used daily. Every Gendarme will have four tools at his disposal: a bureautique suite, for writing documents and doing procedural work, a browser to access the Information Systems, a mail client to communicate and an antivirus. Our first goal is to migrate all the upper layers of the workstation to Open Source Software to be independent of the Operating System.(...)
It's a great pleasure to see this important project being finally revealed to the general public, and to see Gendarmerie Nationale understand the importance of Open Source Software and Web standards. It uses them, and even gives back some code the the community, while telling the world about it. If I had a wish for 2006, it would be to see large users do the same, and tell publicly that they use Open Source projects. For them, it would be a way to give back to these projects something they really need: visibility.
Am I the only one who is amazed that the French Military Police Force has 100,000 personnel working for it? The United States has approximately 840,000 police total, including military police, state police, county police, and federal law enforcement agencies. France's population is only 60.5 million compared to the US' 296 million. Is the military police force in France used for more than just policing members of the French military?
Article slashdotted:
Mirrordot link!
Dependency hell? =>
No worries, my friend - I'll mod them all up for you. ;)
ABSURDITY, n.: A statement or belief manifestly inconsistent with one's own opinion.
but ferreal... who cares?
The more bricks that start falling out of the Microsoft monopoly will encourage extra bricks to fall and might take the entire wall down after some time. Don't forget street credibility! Every small step in the right direction is a small step in the right direction...
Dependency hell? =>
This would seem to be a pretty bold move - think about it. They're using software which wasn't blessed by the winPope at Redmond. Were it any other commercial organization, there would be an acknowledgement that somebody within the organization had to be pretty gutsy to press for a non-Microsoft solution to anything.
Unless the organization were, say, IBM or Sun or HP, for example. ;^D
Just to clear things up the blog is talking about the French Gendarmerie, the french national police force.
It does not mean the actual French Military Police as we would think of it; the police force of the miltary.
the french army only has 136,000~ soldiers!
For Christ's Sake.
20 comments - the majority of which are 'French surrender' jokes.
1) Some originality would be nice.
2) I thought 2006 was the year the American public would wake up to the way they're manipulated (can you remember having the same contempt for the french prior to their [justified] opposition to Iraq II?)
3) Leave the french-hatred to countries that have a reason to hate the french. Like New Zealand or just about anywhere in the South Pacific
4) Some originality would be nice. Every time there's a French story, its like reading fark.
5) Please see points 1 and 5.
My pics.
This slashdot story says, the French Department of Culture have told Free Software authors: "You will be required to change your licenses." And "You shall stop publishing free software," and warn they are ready "to sue free software authors who will keep on publishing source code" should a bill proposal passes in the Parliament.
Oh please. The reason it made the front page is because it's a major switch to Firefox. Doesn't matter who switches, just that some large organization made the switch.
"There is much pleasure to be gained from useless knowledge." - Bertrand Russell.
I like the way they have a specialized "bureautique suite", for generating red tape!
Woah, I hope they all use my "Spread Firefox" referrer button!
--
Superb hosting 2400MB Storage, 120GB bandwidth, ssh, $7.95
I think all countries should be working on their own information exchange platforms.
How do you think Dept. of Homeland Security would feel if all of their computers were running on a closed OS manufactured by China?
It's like outsorcing your whole communication infrastructure to a different country.
Foreign countres would do well to consider switching all of their government computation to open source OSs, or developing their own. Firefox and OO are a good start though.
If you don't know what AltaVista is (was), get off my lawn.
Vive la france!
http://www.TheGamerNation.com/Forums
OEM dealer 1: As in every browser of this size, there is a flaw.
Sultan: A flaw?
Gem dealer 2: The slightest flaw, your excellency.
Gem dealer 1: If you look deep into the browser source code, you will perceive the tiniest discoloration. The fix resembles an animal.
Sultan: An animal?
Gem dealer 1: A little fox.
Sultan: Yes! A fox. Come here, Monkey Ballmer. A gift to your father from his grateful people. Some day it will be yours. The most fabulous browser in all the world. Come close...
It's joke, but it's TIRESOME.
I bet you still go around yelling "I'M RICK JAMES, BITCH!" at friends...
Does it make you happy you're so strange?
2a) No, and it probably isn't next year, either. Most people that I have conversations with about such things either believe that it's for the best or don't believe me at all. Unless people stop believing things just because Congress said so, or the TV/newspaper/etc said so (or we replace those with something trustworthy), this attitude is not likely to change. People seem to be too lazy to actually verify what they hear.
;-)
2b) Yes, I can remember having contempt for France for as long as I knew their history. My humor about France hasn't changed in at least 20 years (coincidentally, the period over which I've made jokes at France's expense). My opinion of France went down over Iraq II, but not because they opposed it. It was because of the backroom deals that they were brokering with Iraq. I also oppose the US meddling in foreign governments. If it weren't for the treaties and such that France had agreed to, I wouldn't care that they were making deals with Iraq.
3) You forgot a significant portion of Africa from the list of places with reason to hate France.
1/4/5) I agree! New France jokes would be very amusing.
Seriously, Slashdot is indicitive of the follow-the-leader mentality just as much as Fark, Digg, Kuroshin, or most anywhere else. People like to fit in, they like being modded up, and they're often somewhat afraid of standing out for voicing a different opinion.
BTW - GP was a joke; lighten up!
...Our first goal is to migrate all the upper layers of the workstation to Open Source Software to be independent of the Operating System.(...)
To me, this was the single most interesting line in the entire article. Telling everyone that they must migrate to another operating system in one big step is bound to meet resistance and hassles. Instead they get people familiar with their day-to-day software tools, so that migrating to Linux/OSX/whatever later is largely irrelevant. If people's word processor and email system are still the same, they won't much care what OS is running.
With this strategy Windows loses its special status and becomes just a commodity, providing only storage and network access. It also becomes replacable on a whim (or close to it).
A quote would be:
Note the omission marks. Or more correctly
"Between strong and weak, between rich and poor [...], it is freedom which oppresses and the law which sets free"
I don't get it, just because they refused to send their young men and women into Iraq to fight for basically American politcal interests, folks hated them?! And don't give me this shit about the Iraq war is part of the War on Terror. Show me some evidence that Hussein was in fact harboring terrorists and/or financing them!
You must be kidding. The French were just trying to protect their under the table oil deals. The Americans catch hell over even the possible implication of doing anything for oil. The French do it and it is suddenly "okay". Give me a break.
Did it occur to you that we're making fun of all the people with an irrational hatred of the French, especially by making such an absurd inferrence?
If Bill O'Reilly says "Well, isn't that just like the french to surrender", he's manipulating his audience (if you think O'Reilly is saying something like that because he actually believes it, you're assuming he's a simpleton. I see people do the same thing with Bush- assume he's an idiot, not someone playing the fool and manipulating people.) If someone on slashdot jokes "Well, isn't it just like the French to surrender and use Firefox", they're making fun of people like Bill O'Reilly, not picking on the French.
Then again, complex humor has never been a strong suite on slashdot...
Oh, and you know what? As long as everyone is laughing, I have zero problems with people cracking jokes about each other. I love teasing my friends from Smith about attending a "finishing school", and they enjoy punching me (they hit like girls, so no worries.) As long as everyone stays laughing, it's a way to celebrate our differences. Or something like that. There are way too many people on this world who take everything so seriously and get offended at the drop of a hat.
Please help metamoderate.
I had a hell of a time upgrading 15 users from 1.0.3 to 1.5.
I just didn't find a way to do it reliably and automatically, preserving the few installed extensions and plugins (Flash, QuickTime+ Real Alternative).
In the end, I had to physically go to each computer and check everything, making sure I also checked everybody's roaming profile.
I love Firefox for myself (it's my main browser since it was called Phoenix), but next time I deploy it in a company, it will need to have clear instructions on how to do that without a physical install/configuration/plugins and extensions install/etc.
I don't mind having to write a few Perl scripts to do it, if I can get clear instructions.
If the French military deployed it to 100000 people, maybe they have documented how they did it? Or maybe they just don't know about the upgrade hell yet?
After all, initial install was easy using FFdeploy. It's the upgrades that are a problem
A lot of U.S. Soldiers use Firefox exclusively. Thanks to websites like portableapps I can get Thunderbird and Firefox installed on my flash so I don't have to go through the bother of dealing with out backwards and semi-retarted IA department to get it installed on the machine I use. After showing it off to most of the people I work with and letting them see all of the great plug-ins and extensions that you can add on, plus custom skinning the browser, these guys were sold.
As to the Army as a whole accpting it, your guess is as good as mine. I only showed the more tech-savvy guys Firefox, some of the dudes around here didn't exactly sign their contract as much as put a bite mark on the dotted line, if you catch my drift. I really don't think that they're the ones that are targeted by Firefox - and that very well could be part of the problem. Most IT/IA soldiers that are outside the Linux / Open Source world see things like Firefox as a waltzing bear. Right or wrong, that's a perception that is going to have to be overcome before this is accepted as a standard, or even as a useable piece of software by those outside "the know".
hi mom!
You surrendered your points when you posted a comment.
In other news, Steve Ballmer has vowed to Fucking Kill(TM) the French military police.
"The way we can tell it's C# instead of Haskell is because it's nine lines instead of two." -- wadler
Seriously kicked the Romans Butts many times as Galacia.
Did so again under Charlemange.
Kicked the English's butts under William the conqueror.
Kicked the English's butts again several times during the 100 years war.
Supported the rebels during the American Revolution.
Nearly united europe during the napoleonic wars (then foolishly tried to invade Russia during the winter).
Held off the german forces in WW I
When invaded by germany in WW II, held out just long enough for the British Expiditionary force to sail from Dunkirk.
After WW II the French failed to re-occupy Indochina due to resistance from the formerly US-backed Viet Minh. They pulled out of Indochina in 1954. The US also failed to gain power in Indochina.
Seriously... It's only from 1940 to 1954 that France's military record is any worse than any other, and when you consider what they were up against (USSR was still operating under the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact when France was invaded, and on continental europe only France stood against the Axis), they really were no worse.
... And this shit about we "rescued them in WWII! We owed them one! How about that! ...
v ision
No, we paid that debt in WWI. "On the 4th of July [1917], the 2nd Battalion, 16th Infantry (2-16), paraded through the streets of Paris to bolster the sagging French spirits. At Lafayette's tomb, one of General John J. Pershing's staff uttered the famous words, "Lafayette, we are here!"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._1st_Infantry_Di
So, to use *your* phraseology, not mine, they owe us one.
Also, the French government that supported the US was the monarchy, not the current French government. "Current government" as in system of government, not the currenyly elected representatives. Do you think Lafayette would do business with Sadaam and make war on GreenPeace (literally, sink boat, kill member, rescue French agents/assasins from jail)?
Definitely a good win again for FireFox. Microsoft better be focusing on launching something respectful with IE 7. (Did I say Microsoft and respectful in the same sentence? Damn!)
[%] Cingular Ringtones
I'm guessing that 30% of the moderators work for Microsoft and 20% of them are French.
I have no objection to political humor. But unlike other kinds of jokes, I think it's fair game to call political jokes on their accuracy. Nobody ever acts as if they really believe an actual priest, rabbi and minister went into a actual bar (Was the minister Methodist? What were they doing going into a bar?). But they do certainly act as if France was a nation composed entierly of cheese eating surrender monkeys.
Many people use political humor as a cheap way of advancing an unsupportable opinion. They get the same rhetorical and emotional impact as making a substantive argument -- possibly even more. But if they get called on it, they can always fall back on the craven excuse that it was just a joke. In fact, the stupider and less original the joke, the greater the dudgeon, in my experience. Peole whose humor is intelligent and incisive don't need to get defensive.
Giving opinions expressed as humor a pass on accuracy is pretty much an invitation for lies, stupidity and moral cowardice to rule the world, which I think none of us really want.
So, if you make a joke whose premise is that Al Gore thinks he invented the Internet, I think it's fair enough for somebody to challenge the factual accuracy. If I make a joke who's point is that GW Bush is stupid, it's fair enough for you to call me on that as well.
In short, it's one thing to be unoriginal. It's another think to think and act like a sheep. We all know where the sheeps' master intends them to go, in the end.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
You can't just add them that way! The 70K that use Firefox likely account for almost all of the 45k that use Tbird, it's very unlikely that anywhere near 100k personnel are involved if there are only 70k Firefox users.
Good numbers still for one organization, but an awful flawed statement to have found it's way into a Slashdot front page. How did this get past our meticulous editors?
I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
Yes, France opposed the war in Iraq because of OFF. Lets look at that logic.
1) How can you claim that it had nothing to do with 75% of the French public opposing the invasion? After all, it's not like leaders in democracies who act contrary to the will of 75% of their populace on major issues tend to have trouble getting reelected.
2) What is the logic of France risking their trade with the US to make a small fraction of the few billion dollars involved in the Oil For Food program? This trade involves 2,400 French subsidiaries in the US employing 500,000 people with 160B$ turnover, and the converse (US subsidiaries in France, which employ 580,000 people with 135B$ turnover). France owns 143B$ of US stock, a fourfold increase in the past decade. The US owns 55B euros of French stock, doubling over the past decade. In 2003, the US imported 23B euros worth of French goods; France imported 22.4B euros worth from America.
3) The oil for food program involved roughly 4-5B$ (over its decade long lifespan) in kickbacks to the *Iraqi government*. Most people here are painfully unaware of how it worked, so let me clarify - it occured just the same way that it happens in third world nations all over the world to enrich the pockets of government officials. An unscrupulous company
offers to sweeten the pot (in this case, to the Iraqi government) by raising their prices artificially. The government selects the contract of the overpriced goods. The company then discretely pays the extra money under the table to the Iraqi government. The company gets the contract, and the kickback-receiving party (the Iraqi government) manages to divert money from protected funds to their pockets.
Many people confuse kickbacks with the accused payoffs of officials. Some payoffs have been confirmed, and resulted in convictions. Others have been proven to be false, and resulted even in successful libel suits against the accusors. Part of the problems in the list of the accused may be the source - it came from the Iraqi Oil Ministry, which at the time was run by the Iraqi National Congress (not exactly a beacon of truthful information). The payoffs tend to be small - usually a few tens to a few hundred thousand dollars (compared to the billions in kickbacks under OFF, and tens of billions in oil smuggling). The highest ranking French official accused is former interior minister Charles Pasqua and his aide Bernard Guillet. Not only has Pasqua denied all of the charges (and is actively working to clear his name), and not only would the interior minister not be prominant in a decision to go to war, but he hasn't even been in office since 1995. There are two other French former officials under investigation - Jean-Bernard Merimee and Serge Boidevaix - but they likewise had not been in office when the alleged crimes took place.
"WANTED: Sinking ship seeks rats."
I wonder if people are "Freedom kissing" too?
If you mod me down, I *will* introduce you to my sister!
(Apart from that I agree with the parent post. The anti-France stuff is just another reminder that a lot of high-school kids post to Slashdot.)
Uh...Dude. France IS a bunch of cheese eating surrender monkeys
Haven't you ever used google images?
Concerning all of the French surrender comments, I feel obligated to quote the site http://weblog.blogads.com/comments/514_0_1_0_C/
"World War I cost France 1,357,800 dead, 4,266,000 wounded (of whom 1.5 million were permanently maimed) and 537,000 made prisoner or missing -- exactly 73% of the 8,410,000 men mobilized, according to William Shirer in The Collapse of the Third Republic. Some context: France had 40 million citizens at the start of the war; six in ten men between the ages of eighteen and twenty-eight died or were permanently maimed."
And further down on that page...
"But to be fair to the French. I don't believe a national characteristic of "cowardice" exists. Aside from the pathetic surrender and weak resistance during World War II, the French have actually been quite brave in battle. They were brave in Vietnam (French Indochina), brave in World War I, they played a role in the initiation of the Franco-Prussian War, and throughout history they have been willing to fight heroically even when the odds were against them. It is true that they have had little military success in the last 150 years. But this is due to poor military strategy, faulty equipment, and general bungling, it has nothing to do with French cowardice. Of course, I still can't say much for the half hearted defense of France during World War II. But that is more of the exception than the rule."
Navicula hydraulica plena anguilarum est. Omnes castelli tuus nostri sunt. Ed elli avea del cul fatto trombetta.
Yeah, I'm American and I notice a "French-bashing" population here. However, it more had to do with the fact (or percieved fact) that France was very eager to sell weapons and equipment to Sadaam. Also, many Americans have stated the arrogance they faced in Paris. It is a fairly popular opinion, or at least an opinion of the loudest voices, that the French treat the US with hostility and arrogance, such as France's rigid resistance toward English. I can't exactly blame France for trying to protect its national unity, but English is indeed the language of business, thanks to the French archrival, Britain, and thus the French response, creating new "official" words for American products with English names, absolutely disgusts us. Language for the sake of national unity is one valid goal, but language for the sake of pride is just ridiculous. The US's frustration with France really stems from the fact that the US absolutely saved France's posterior in both World War I and World War II. It is said, "if not for English-speakers, French-speakers would be speaking German." That said, the US also sees room to poke fun at France for its failures in military, being only marginally successful when being led by Joan of Arc and Napoleon Bonaparte. The other American criticism of France is its outspoken criticism of the US going to war, as if the UN Security Council had to absolutely approve the war. In fact, each country is still allowed to act in its own interests; the US asked the UN, and upon denial, struck anyway. Back home, many of us, including myself, believe that WMD should never have been used as a reason for war. The US's interests were indeed the fight against radical islam, but psuedocauses were leaked out of the White House on many occasions, leading Americans and the world to believe that Bush acted for the sake of oil (which is absurd; we could simply invade Venezuela for oil) or other causes . The US really wished to blackmail Saudi Arabia and threaten Libya, Syria, and other nations sponsoring radical islamic terrorism. Everyone honestly thought that Sadaam did indeed have WMD, including the French and the Germans. You mentioned Sweden's opposition, but keep in mind that Sweden is a historically Neutral country since the Viking ages and that they were no outspoken critic, as France and Germany were. Of course, you raise a valid point about Chirac. In Germany, a new ruling coalition is much more in favor of US policy, and Chirac's slide of popularity is indicating a much more US-friendly government in France at the next election. I mentioned that I am not a Bush fan, and I am almost certain that after this term, his party will not get a reelection. Hope I provided some insight into how America feels. I don't really justify the hateful anti-French messages, but I do occasionally poke fun. :-X
No, france opposed the war because of the French Military-Industrial complex. Did you miss the fact that the Iraqi airforce (when it existed) was made up French Mirage's? Or that if sanctions ended, it would be french oil companies set to make billions from Iraqi (and Iranian oil)?
In addition to being a bunch of CESMs, they have just as much corporate influence as the US does. Don't pretend they opposed the war on some hippy peace loving principles. Hussein was practically an ally of theirs.
It's amazing that the people who whine that we saved France in WWII so conveniently forget that Soviet Russia saved our asses in that same war... If it wasn't for the 20 million Russians who died fighting Hitler, who knows how much more bloody that war would have been for Americans.
Britain could not stop the Germans in either World War. In fact, if the British and the French of the time had accepted Wilson's plan for peace as the Treaty of Versailles, World War II would likely never have happened. Also, the Allies were for a time losing the first World War. The American entrance in retaliation to the German provocation as well as the Zimmerman telegram (admittedly provided by the British secret service) tipped the scales of the war in favor of Allied forces, especially with a revolution and pull-out of Russia. In WWII, Germany nearly obliterated the UK, though America could have definitely learned from the British knowledge base. I don't recall, however, seeing that the British stopped the Germans from invading France in 18 days. The British seemed to buy that argument about the Ardennes forest. Ironically, Blitzkrieg was originally thought of by a French guy (and they were too proud to enact it). I also didn't see the French or the British laying down the law on the Germans after they signed the Treaty of Versailles (the US became very isolationist afterward and did not even ratify the treaty). History has all but proven that Hitler's rise stemmed from punishment of the Germans following World War I. Without the US in either World War, Britain would have put up a strong fight, but there is as good a chance the Central/Axis powers would have been victorious. As for the American Revolution, you are indeed correct. This is no small contribution, but when we returned the favor in World War I and II and then in Vietnam (after which we were deserted by the French) the French government outspokenly criticizes the US so they can sell weapons and equipment to a ruthless dictator? Also keep in mind that early in the US's history, the French provocated war on the US in several instances, such as the XYZ affair. The French simply do not have superb military gift. The British and the Americans combined make up the force to win wars, but Britain needed external man-power and equipment in World War II, especially after the air-raids by the Nazis. Britain contributing "substantially more" is outrageous; only after US involvent in both World Wars, did the Allied powers come out ahead.
Probably, but they aren't reading these comments ;)
--Joey