Slashdot Mirror


French Parliament Chooses Ubuntu

atamyrat reminds us that last November it was announced that the French Parliament had decided to switch to Linux. At that time the distro had not been determined. It will be Ubuntu: "[T]wo companies, Linagora and Unilog, have been selected to provide the members of the Parliament as well as their assistants new computers containing free software. This will amount to 1,154 new computers running Ubuntu prior to the start of the next session which occurs in June 2007."

174 comments

  1. I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... by Tokimasa · · Score: 1, Interesting

    It strikes me as a good distro for individuals new to Linux, but I personally would never deploy Ubuntu in a business or government setting. I would go for something a little more enterprise-ish, like Fedora, (Open)SUSE, or Debian.

    --
    --Thomas J. Owens
    1. Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... by Noryungi · · Score: 1


      Hmmm... As long as their servers are secure, Ubuntu is as good a choice as any other.

      You said it yourself: it's a good distro for individuals new to Linux.

      --
      The right to offend is far more important than the right not to be offended. (Rowan Atkinson)
    2. Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... by dragonquest · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't dream of using Fedora in such a situation seeing the stablity issues Fedora Core 5 had out of the box. If I had to run for something free, I'd choose CentOS 4.4. Rock solid stablity and still top notch for usability.

      --
      "Never try to tell everything you know. It may take too short a time."
    3. Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... by cyclop · · Score: 1

      Why? What are the fundamental differences? Support? You can buy support from Canonical, AFAIK.

      --
      -- Patent no.123456: A way to personalize /. comments with a sig attached to the end.
    4. Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... by JonathanR · · Score: 1

      Perhaps you might like to elaborate on your aversion to Ubuntu in this situation?

    5. Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... by Tokimasa · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I used Ubuntu for about a day. I found it to be childish and rudimentary. It didn't strike me as something professional or suitable for a working environment, but rather something that I would use in a school (elementary or middle/junior high) or at home for someone who is new to computing or new to Linux.

      I must admit, though, that it's been about a year since I tried Ubuntu. Maybe it has changed. But I read the site around the time the last release (Fiesty Fawn, I think it was) came out and it didn't look like a lot had changed.

      --
      --Thomas J. Owens
    6. Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... by Short+Circuit · · Score: 3, Insightful

      To me, Fedora is the RPM equivalent of Ubuntu.

      I'm not sure either should be used as an enterprise's first Linux desktop rollout; Windows admins aren't accustomed to their relatively furious rate of major releases.

      Debian might have been a better choice, with its slow release cycle and decent security patch rollout rate.

    7. Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... by MartinG · · Score: 4, Funny

      enterprise-ish

      Would you care to define enterprise-ish for us non-bullshit speaking types?

      --
      -- MartinG To mail me: echo kewyjlcxyzvjfxbqwh | tr bcefhjklqvwxyz .@adgimnoprstu
    8. Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... by Tokimasa · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Enterprise-ish is something that is professional, powerful but easy to use, and expandable to multiple conditions and types of users (from the office secretary to an ace developer).

      --
      --Thomas J. Owens
    9. Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... by MartinG · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That sounds like pretty good description of Ubuntu to me!

      Which of those characteristics you describe are Fedora, (Open)SUSE or Debian better than Ubuntu at?

      Just to be clear, I'm not saying I think think Ubuntu is better than the others. In fact Fedora is probably my favourite disto. I just don't see how it is more "enterprise-ish" than Ubuntu is.

      --
      -- MartinG To mail me: echo kewyjlcxyzvjfxbqwh | tr bcefhjklqvwxyz .@adgimnoprstu
    10. Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... by Orgazmus · · Score: 1

      Ant it must use XML as an "Information backbone" to call itself truly enterprise worthy.

      --
      The system had the verbosity of HTML combined with all the readability of compiled assembly viewed as bitmap images
    11. Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... by Xymor · · Score: 1

      If you're aiming for enterprise-ish why not chose RHEL over Fedora?

      It's admirable they are moving to open software, but their priority should be requiring the use of standards compiling software in all government areas.

    12. Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You've just described Ubuntu.

    13. Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... by hey! · · Score: 1

      I agree SUSE would be a better choice.

      The biggest and most critical challenge they're likely to have is directory services. I know that LDAP is up to the job, the question is, are their IT staff up to LDAP? With SUSE, they could cushion the blow by going with Novell's directory solutions.

      Aside from that, I don't think it makes much difference at all which of the mainline distros they take.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    14. Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... by Carewolf · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Who is modding down all critique of Ubuntu? I use Ubuntu every day, and it is really a immature* piece of shit.

      (* as in immature software, not immature attitude)

      It feels as stable and coherent as Red Hat or SuSE 6 years ago. It needs lots of work to be a modern Linux distribution.

    15. Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... by meringuoid · · Score: 2, Informative
      I'm not sure either should be used as an enterprise's first Linux desktop rollout; Windows admins aren't accustomed to their relatively furious rate of major releases.

      There's no law saying you have to be bleeding-edge; they can perfectly well stick with Dapper, which is the current 'long term support' release. The rest of us can install pre-release versions of Feisty if we want, but it's certainly not compulsory.

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
    16. Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The thing is that Ubuntu is built around the latest and greatest bleeding edge bits and pieces, it's quite common for stable packages to be replaced with beta versions and for things to break horribly without warning. Maybe Ubuntu could start releasing a toned down distribution for use in environments where stability and predictable behaviour is more important.

    17. Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      By choosing SUSE you're a direct supporter of both Microsoft and software patents.

    18. Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... by Knuckles · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The thing is that Ubuntu is built around the latest and greatest bleeding edge bits and pieces, it's quite common for stable packages to be replaced with beta versions and for things to break horribly without warning. Maybe Ubuntu could start releasing a toned down distribution for use in environments where stability and predictable behaviour is more important.

      You have no clue how the Ubuntu releases work, do you? What you proposing exists since 06/2006, it is called Ubuntu 6.06 LTS

      --
      "When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
    19. Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... by Zonk+(troll) · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Hmm. Perhaps you haven't heard of the LTS release. Dapper is supported on the desktop for 3 years, 5 on the server. Packages are stable, only getting security and bug fixes. Similar to RHEL. I'm sure this is what they're planning on using. If not, they need to fire the implementers.

      --
      "The Federal Reserve is a fraudulent system."--Lew Rockwell
      End The FED. -
    20. Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... by meringuoid · · Score: 2, Funny
      Would you care to define enterprise-ish for us non-bullshit speaking types?

      enterpriseish: expensive, in such a way as to allow the head of IT to justify his large budget and hence status within the organisation; carries connotations of several very nice lunches with vendors and junkets to important conferences on an expense account.

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
    21. Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      By choosing SUSE you're a direct supporter of both Microsoft and software patents. und zie germans... something the french are particularly known for.
    22. Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... by Zonk+(troll) · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Who is modding down all critique of Ubuntu? I use Ubuntu every day, and it is really a immature* piece of shit. Can you elaborate? Ubuntu provides a Usable desktop out of the box. Fedora and RHEL need a good amount of tweaking to get decent. Ie, the default Gnome config is rather bad and it's KDE needs to be replaced to work adequately.

      IMHO, the main area Ubuntu lacks is in configuration. It's a step backwards in that regard as it does require editing config files if the default doesn't cut it. Ie, if you need to change something with X you have to modify /etc/X11/xorg.conf wile Fedora/RHEL have system-config-display. This really needs to be addressed.
      --
      "The Federal Reserve is a fraudulent system."--Lew Rockwell
      End The FED. -
    23. Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... by Da+Fokka · · Score: 2, Funny

      Linus... is that you?

    24. Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      The Live CD - version would be be a boon to French computer security!
        No passwords or incriminating data will be stored on stolen from hard drive or secondary storage ever again!
        , and never suffer computer data theft or security issues from a computer hard disk again

      Live CD- isathe ticket to stopping data theft from computers from secondary storage like hard disks forever!
        Because No hard disk or secondary storage need be in the machine, a stolen computer reveals no data to the thieves .

    25. Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... by Zombie+Ryushu · · Score: 1

      I use Mandriva. Unofficially I tend to call Linux domain controllers in large networks "Destroyer Class" Linux Machines (That is just my slang for it. Think Babylon 5.)

      Generally a Destroyer Class Linux Box:

      Runs OpenLDAP, Samba, Bind, Kerberos
      Manages Wifi and VPNs with FreeRadius.
      Can use SSH to deploy applications to an entire network in one command
      Runs a Groupware Solution, like Scalix.
      Runs a Mail Server that also retrieves information from LDAP
      Maybe runs an Apache server, but thats rather common. Usually includes PHP, or Perl, and a MySQL server.
      Uses Nagios or some other NMS
      Uses Snort for traffic monitoring.

      I could go on. But you get the idea. These things are hard to build, and hard, and time consuming.

    26. Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... by und0 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Probably you aren't aware, but "debconf" (the tool) has a (working?) GTK backend, other than the "cursed" one...

    27. Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... by Phisbut · · Score: 1

      It's admirable they are moving to open software, but their priority should be requiring the use of standards compiling software in all government areas.

      Ubuntu uses GCC, which is a pretty standard compiler to me...

      --
      After 3 days without programming, life becomes meaningless
      - The Tao of Programming
    28. Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... by mushadv · · Score: 1

      NVIDIA users have the nvidia-settings GUI that modifies resolution, refresh rate and pretty much anything else any "normal user" would ever need to change. I believe anyone looking to do something more obscure wouldn't really be bothered by xorg.conf. Users of free drivers usually have their needs covered by the DE-supplied app. ATI users on the other hand are pretty much up shit creek, but concerning Linux, they've always been.

    29. Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... by Carewolf · · Score: 2, Informative

      In Ubuntu or Kubuntu you need to replace both GNOME and KDE to get something stable. They apply a bunch of experimental patches to "improve" the experience, but the patches often creates more bugs.

      There also seems to lack mature features for installing 3rd party content. This might not be much of a problem for really basic desktop user, but for a standard Linux users not being able to install and run tar-balls is a real problem (ubuntu doesn't even include /usr/local to PATH!), and they have obscured everything but /home and /mnt in the file-browsers, making it hard to access your webpage in /var/www, your source code in /src and your optional packages in /opt !!

    30. Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... by mushadv · · Score: 2, Informative

      In Ubuntu or Kubuntu you need to replace both GNOME and KDE to get something stable. They apply a bunch of experimental patches to "improve" the experience, but the patches often creates more bugs.

      For serious? I haven't heard about any of this, nor experienced any of its effects (to my knowledge).

      There also seems to lack mature features for installing 3rd party content. This might not be much of a problem for really basic desktop user, but for a standard Linux users not being able to install and run tar-balls is a real problem (ubuntu doesn't even include /usr/local to PATH!), and they have obscured everything but /home and /mnt in the file-browsers, making it hard to access your webpage in /var/www, your source code in /src and your optional packages in /opt !!

      Last I checked, hidden system folders is a Kubuntu-specific feature.

    31. Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... by Vexorian · · Score: 1

      I have been able to test Red hat 6 years ago and I currently use ubuntu. Must say that your statement doesn't look right.

      --

      Copyright infringement is "piracy" in the same way DRM is "consumer rape"
    32. Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... by LingNoi · · Score: 2, Funny

      We must tell the French government! What will they do without being able to find their source code!?

    33. Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... by an.echte.trilingue · · Score: 1

      You have no clue how the Ubuntu releases work, do you? What you proposing exists since 06/2006, it is called Ubuntu 6.06 LTS
      About September last year, an xorg update in Dapper broke support for my (shitty) SavageS3 graphics card, causing a hard crash every 20 minutes or so. The only solution was to reinstall the old xorg and apt-pin it, but after a while that prevented other things from getting their upgrades. Switched to Etch, problem solved. As of mid-February, the problem was still there in Ubuntu.

      Ubuntu is great, but LTS ain't all it's cracked up to be.

      --
      weirdest thing I ever saw: scientology advertising on slashdot.
    34. Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... by kripkenstein · · Score: 1

      In Ubuntu or Kubuntu you need to replace both GNOME and KDE to get something stable. They apply a bunch of experimental patches to "improve" the experience, but the patches often creates more bugs.

      What? I am using Ubuntu right here with GNOME, it works fine. Sure there are a few bugs, but all software has bugs (I've seen more bugs on other 'major' distros, actually). So I really don't know what you are complaining about. Perhaps you should be more specific about what bugs you have encountered.

      As for Kubuntu and KDE, I don't use them, so I can't say.
    35. Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... by physicsnick · · Score: 1

      In Ubuntu or Kubuntu you need to replace both GNOME and KDE to get something stable. They apply a bunch of experimental patches to "improve" the experience, but the patches often creates more bugs. I have no idea what this is supposed to mean. What would you replace these with? Was that a plug for XFCE/Fluxbox/etc disguised as a flaw in Ubuntu? What "experimental patches" are you talking about?

      There also seems to lack mature features for installing 3rd party content. This might not be much of a problem for really basic desktop user, but for a standard Linux users not being able to install and run tar-balls is a real problem (ubuntu doesn't even include /usr/local to PATH!) That's an outright fabrication.

      nick@nick:~$ echo $PATH
      /usr/local/sbin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin: /sbin:/bin:/usr/bin/X11:/usr/games

      I install tarballs for various applications (including things like Loki installers) all the time. I've been doing so since Dapper and it has always worked flawlessly. When was the last time you tried Ubuntu?
    36. Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... by Nutria · · Score: 1
      Enterprise-ish is something that is professional, powerful but easy to use, and expandable to multiple conditions and types of users (from the office secretary to an ace developer).

      "Enterprise" systems
      • handle lots of data
      • can be stripped down and highly configured to one task, or bulked up to be able to accomplish many simultaneous tasks,
      • don't choke when stressed,
      • are remotely administered,
      • are highly scriptable and automated,
      • are secure against viruses,
      • are constantly monitored (by eyeballs or automated systems)
      • are backed up every night.

      --
      "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
    37. Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... by BiggyP · · Score: 1

      That doesn't sounds much like dapper to me, it's just the same old bleeding edge ubuntu with a longer support period, i've heard all manner of horror stories about 6.06

    38. Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... by Knuckles · · Score: 1

      About September last year, an xorg update in Dapper broke support for my (shitty) SavageS3 graphics card

      Sucks when it happens, but it is still just a bug in what is intended to be what the OP wanted.

      --
      "When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
    39. Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... by Knuckles · · Score: 1

      it's just the same old bleeding edge ubuntu with a longer support period, i've heard all manner of horror stories about 6.06

      Well, it's not. The changes from Warty to Hoary to Breezy to Dapper have become more progressively more conservative. Breezy to Dapper was for many people quite disappointing because not much exciting happened, just polish.

      I don't know what horror stories you have heard, but every OS has bugs. All 6.06 installations I have done (some for people without a clue whatsoever) worked like a charm and continued to do so since.

      --
      "When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
    40. Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      And with such god awful performance that the users would never have time to produce any sensitive data in the first place, win win!

    41. Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > By choosing SUSE you're a direct supporter of both Microsoft and software patents.

      I believe that would make the GP an indirect supporter.

    42. Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a very serious sounding bug

    43. Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... by 5of0 · · Score: 1

      There also seems to lack mature features for installing 3rd party content. This might not be much of a problem for really basic desktop user, but for a standard Linux users not being able to install and run tar-balls is a real problem (ubuntu doesn't even include /usr/local to PATH!), and they have obscured everything but /home and /mnt in the file-browsers, making it hard to access your webpage in /var/www, your source code in /src and your optional packages in /opt !!
      I don't know what you're talking about, perhaps it's a KDE thing like a poster above said. Because I'm running Ubuntu with GNOME, and my /var, /src, and /opt is one click away: Click places, keep holding, move down to "File System", let go. Wow! Look! Folders for var, src, opt, lib, usr, bin...everything your little heart desires! And if you want to see .gaim in your ~/ folder, hit Ctrl+H - unless that's too challenging. And I've got Beryl set up so I can hit Super+R to get a Run dialog, so I can open _anything_ and it auto/tab completes. In the original gnome setup, it's Alt-F2.
      Sorry, but you're just plain wrong.
      As far as tarballs, I've been just fine, sudo ./configure, sudo make, make install. No problems, and I'm not exactly a linux pro. And the DEB installer is painless, if they're nice enough to give you that.
      --
      You all have Oo.o and Firefox, so get World Wind.
    44. Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... by glittalogik · · Score: 1

      I got fried by the same update, but that's why we have IT departments who test updates before they get fed out over the intranet, and (I hope) will at least know how to fix stuff from a CLI, even if the end-user doesn't.

    45. Re:I don't get why they would use Ubuntu... by Zonk+(troll) · · Score: 1

      In Ubuntu or Kubuntu you need to replace both GNOME and KDE to get something stable. They apply a bunch of experimental patches to "improve" the experience, but the patches often creates more bugs. Hmm. Have you actually used Ubuntu? With both Dapper and Edgy the Gnome desktop works perfectly out of the box. Better than any other distro I've tried, and I've been using Linux as my primary OS since '96. KDE in Dapper worked well, though I dropped it in favor of Gnome due to how nice Gnome was in Dapper. KDE was my desktop of choice since '99, BTW. I haven't tried KDE with Edgy, but I do use several KDE apps (Quanta, Krita, Kate (gEdit sucks, IMHO), etc) and they work very well.

      I know with Fedora, the Gnome desktop was very irritating (still is with FC6). It's KDE wasn't usable which is why the first thing I did to a Fedora install is replace it's KDE with the kde-redhat builds.

      With Ubuntu I have not had these problems.

      There also seems to lack mature features for installing 3rd party content. This might not be much of a problem for really basic desktop user It's easy to install third party software. For example, download a .deb for Exaile or Opera. Double click it and it will install. If you want libdvdcss2 and w32codecs, for example, add one line* to add Medibuntu and you're good.

      * Here is that one line:
      deb http://medibuntu.sos-sts.com/repo/ edgy free non-free

      Also, Ubuntu contains a massive amount of packages. Just make sure to enable Universe, Multiverse, and Backports (these are all official but are commented out by default in /etc/apt/sources.list). Just take a look:


      user@localhost:~$ apt-cache pkgnames|wc -l
      26362


      That's 26,362 packages...

      but for a standard Linux users not being able to install and run tar-balls is a real problem What are you talking about? apt-get install build-essentials and you get the base packages for building source files. Though due to the massive amount of packages available it's not really necessary to build much from source.

      (ubuntu doesn't even include /usr/local to PATH!) Bullshit.

      user@localhost:~$ echo $PATH /usr/local/sbin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin: /sbin:/bin:/usr/bin/X11:/usr/games

      and they have obscured everything but /home and /mnt in the file-browsers I have not experienced that with Nautilus or the command line.
      --
      "The Federal Reserve is a fraudulent system."--Lew Rockwell
      End The FED. -
  2. Quick French Lesson For Posters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    chair == chaise

    throw == jet

    monkey == singe

    boy == garçon

    1. Re:Quick French Lesson For Posters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Le singe est dans l'arbre
      La chaise est dans l'arbre
      Mr. Balmer conduit l'autobus

    2. Re:Quick French Lesson For Posters by meringuoid · · Score: 2, Insightful
      It isn't as if the French have ever made a major correct decision...

      INVADE IRAQ? [Y/N] _

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
    3. Re:Quick French Lesson For Posters by Silver+Sloth · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It isn't as if the French have ever made a major correct decision... Yeah, their decision to support those damn rebels in the colonies and help them overthrow their rightful British rulers, that was a real bad one! And that stupid statue they gave them, how inappropriate!

      In more recent times, their decsion to stay out of a disasterous war based on dubious evidence is looking better and better as time goes by.
      --
      init 11 - for when you need that edge.
    4. Re:Quick French Lesson For Posters by dlasley · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I'll grant that as a rebuttal to the parent post, but the unfortunate truth in the U.S. is that a dramatic lack of historical scholarship and a distinct inability to grasp the nuances of the presence means that thousands of "decision-makers" around the country will look at this headline and say "well, if France is doing it, it must be anti-American since they support back invading Iraq". The fact that is was probably a smart call doesn't matter to people who's only worries are the three-month and six-month profit forecasts. Those decision-makers - many of whom have no excuse other than their own inadequacies - will see this as (optimistic) a ratification of Americanization and choose RedHat or (pessimistic) view it as yet another transgression by the neo-socialist liberals against the goodness of capitalism and choose Microsoft.

      So far, Kubuntu (I like KDE, what can I say?) has been excellent as both a laptop and workstation platform, and I do have Ubuntu on a handful of servers. My personal choice would be Ubuntu/Kubuntu over just about anything else, and I applaud the decision and hope (uber-optimistically) that it's the beginning of this so-called tipping point for Linux on the desktop.

      --
      when it rains, it gets real soggy. when it pours, i'm under the tap just _waiting_ for the joy
    5. Re:Quick French Lesson For Posters by o'reor · · Score: 1
      De colère, Monsieur Ballmer jette sa chaise à travers l'hémicycle.


      :-)

      --
      In Soviet Russia, our new overlords are belong to all your base.
    6. Re:Quick French Lesson For Posters by Hexstream · · Score: 0

      Throw == lancer, not jet.

      --
      Theory is often inaccurate(TM)
    7. Re:Quick French Lesson For Posters by j79zlr · · Score: 1

      So I guess the distro wars are getting tighter, Ubuntu just surrendered......

      --
      I'm not not licking toads.
    8. Re:Quick French Lesson For Posters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean [Cancel][Allow]?

    9. Re:Quick French Lesson For Posters by Experiment+626 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      It isn't as if the French have ever made a major correct decision...
      INVADE IRAQ? [Y/N] _

      While it's an interesting example, Iraq is ultimately a decision that doesn't have a "correct" answer...

      The first George Bush attacked Iraq but left Saddam Hussein in power. He was widely criticized for not finishing the job.

      Bill Clinton pretty much much ignored Iraq, even though he believed them to be pursuing nuclear and other WMD programs. He was widely criticized for doing nothing.

      George W. Bush attacked Iraq and overthrew Saddam Hussein, but without Hussein's brutal yet stabilizing regime, the place plunged into chaos, with countless terror attacks and near civil war. Bush was widely criticized for this, even by many who supported the invasion when it was launched.

      France were quite content to look the other way on Saddam Hussein's atrocities because they had a nice trade relationship with him. They were widely criticized for this "cheese eating surrender monkey" approach.

      It seems like coming up with a "correct" way to deal with Iraq isn't so simple after all.

    10. Re:Quick French Lesson For Posters by Nutria · · Score: 1
      Yeah, their decision to support those damn rebels in the colonies and help them overthrow their rightful British rulers, that was a real bad one!

      You think it was because the King of France was a democrat? Or course not. French assistance of the American Revolution was "cold war politics" solely aimed at hurting England.

      And that stupid statue they gave them, how inappropriate!

      And ever since, bleeding hearts have have forgotten that "Give me your tired, your poor,
      Your huddled masses" is not inscribed in the Declaration of Independence.

      --
      "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
    11. Re:Quick French Lesson For Posters by tnk1 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, their decision to support those damn rebels in the colonies and help them overthrow their rightful British rulers, that was a real bad one! And that stupid statue they gave them, how inappropriate!


      Actually, it was a pretty shitty decision for the regime in France to support the colonies. Our revolution inspired the French Revolution, and the French Revolution got the head cut off of the same King who supported our revolution.

      Oops.

    12. Re:Quick French Lesson For Posters by Serious+Callers+Only · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      France were quite content to look the other way on Saddam Hussein's atrocities because they had a nice trade relationship with him.


      oh I wonder, what was the US doing before they attacked Iraq?

      The correct answer is not to support coups and tin-pot dictators[1] all over the world. The atrocities of Saddam are irrelevant to the US/UK invasion of Iraq, it's all about control over the region, and nothing to do with the people of Iraq. If you believe in the war for moral reasons, you've been sold down the river.

      The correct answer was and is to leave Iraq alone, not to sell the weapons for a genocidal war with Iran, not support the dictator in power, and not invade when things went pear-shaped and he had delusions of grandeur then leave without disturbing him, not to blow hot and cold with rebel groups in his country, and not to invade and depose him then disband the organs of state without planning for the aftermath.

      They were widely criticized for this "cheese eating surrender monkey" approach.


      I guess we won't hear so much of this stale joke when the US finally retreat from Iraq; won't seem so funny then. I suppose it provides a small amount of comfort to think of others as somehow inherently weak and cowardly, particularly in times of insecurity.
    13. Re:Quick French Lesson For Posters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nevertheless, the french are more trouble than they're worth. English Canadians have had a bellyfull of them. The attitude for years towards them has been "Separate and be damned." Fishy, how they keep winning the elections, or rather, how the english canadian never gets a proper mandate, while the frenchman gets a 12 year run.

    14. Re:Quick French Lesson For Posters by OmegaBlac · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yea, they chose to invade the Ivory Coast instead. http://www.wsws.org/articles/2004/nov2004/ivor-n09 .shtml/ France's decision not to invade Iraq was a financial one--they were doing business with Saddam including the Oil-for-Food scandal.

    15. Re:Quick French Lesson For Posters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Bill Clinton pretty much much ignored Iraq, even though he believed them to be pursuing nuclear and other WMD programs. He was widely criticized for doing nothing. I see this historical revisionism a lot and just plain don't get it. Were you paying any attention to reality during the Clinton administration? Clinton did not "pretty much ignore Iraq", he extended the no fly zone, got congress to pass the "Iraq Liberation Act", bombed the fuck out of them, etc.
      In 1998 when he tried to hold Saddam to account for non-cooperation with the UNSCOM regime by bombing a wide variety of targets (mostly related to WMD production) he was widely criticized for it BY REPUBLICANS. They said he was trying to "wag the dog" and that there wasn't a real threat from Saddam, it was all just hype. Go look at the actual record of events during the Clinton administration. Look at how many tons of bombs were dropped on Iraq every year of his presidency, look at how many missions were flown over the no-fly zone in Iraq, look at his public comments during re: Iraq. It's complete and total bullshit that the very same people who mocked Clinton for attacking Saddam in 1998 now try to spin it in the opposite direction.
    16. Re:Quick French Lesson For Posters by OmegaBlac · · Score: 1

      So why is France in the Ivory Coast then? http://www.wsws.org/articles/2004/nov2004/ivor-n09 .shtml

    17. Re:Quick French Lesson For Posters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please don't confuse the poor neo-cons with your liberal "facts". In their world, reality is dictated by what they hear on the Rush Limbaugh show and in church on Sunday morning, not by demonstrable facts.

    18. Re:Quick French Lesson For Posters by oliderid · · Score: 4, Interesting

      "France were quite content to look the other way on Saddam Hussein's atrocities because they had a nice trade relationship with him. They were widely criticized for this "cheese eating surrender monkey" approach."

      1. Correction: they were widely criticized in the US.
      Americans were convinced that it was part of the war against terrorism while the Frenchmen were not. Do you remember these so called Al Qaeda bases in Iraq? Or these Iraqi chemical stocks, the mobile lab? The fake British report? I do. de Villepin speech was acclaimed by most foreign countries. I stil remember it.
      2. The US supported Saddam when he invaded Iran (just like France, Germany and countless of other western countries).
      3. Nobody reacted when he gazed Kurds in the 80's.
      4. Nobody tried to support the Shia uprising after the first Gulf war.

      Of course the real US agenda was different (securing oil production, stabilization of the region, etc.) and the American agenda was in opposition with some French interests (French oil companies had secured extremely lucrative deal in Iraq prior to the invasion).

      The US had a "grand vision" of the middle east (getting rid of dictators, bringing democracy and western values, securing this major oil source). the French government didn't share it and they wanted to protect their own interests. Both failed miserably.

    19. Re:Quick French Lesson For Posters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wait, I thought the French were a bunch of commie pinkos? Now people are saying they are a bunch of heartless capitalists who passed up billions of dollars in US reconstruction contracts and access to the post-Saddam Iraq because um... some French companies did business in Iraq under Saddam?

      Psst... US companies also did business in Iraq under Saddam. US companies were also involved in the Oil-for-Food scandal. The US govt. tried to buy French and Russian support for the invasion by offering them billions of dollars in reconstruction contracts and access to the Iraqi economy. The amount of money more than made up for the money they were owed by Saddam's govt. and both Russia and France both knew the US was going in with or without them. They could either come along for the ride and make money or sit it out and lose money. They both chose to sit it out. Saying that this was for financial reasons is completely and totally backwards.

    20. Re:Quick French Lesson For Posters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Logic alert!

      Pointing out the falsehood of the claim that the French only make bad decisions doesn't mean that they only (or even mostly) make good decisions...

    21. Re:Quick French Lesson For Posters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you read the article you link to it explains why. The Ivory Coast govt. murdered 9 French citizens, 1 American, and injured 31 people in a sneak attack on a French facility. I'm sure if Saddam attacked France they would have also participated in the US war on Iraq.

    22. Re:Quick French Lesson For Posters by jschmitz · · Score: 0

      Isn't all this bullshit French bashing over with the disgrace of the neo-cons and the bush administration??? They are also Formula One double world champions (Renault) 06 - 07

    23. Re:Quick French Lesson For Posters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is quite an arrogant statement, ignoring both historical facts and philosophical works of that time.

      France was de facto governed by an absolute monarchy since Louis XIV (more or less 1660). And when I write "absolute", I mean it. We even had our own Guantanamo, back then. It was called the Bastille.

      And since years before, the crops were bad, people had nothing to eat while the nobles were flaunted off their money in useless feasts and pleasures.

      In the other end, it was the "century of lights", so-called because philosophers, long before 1783, were writing about separation of powers and questionning the moral (and temporal) power of the church, or even the absolute power of the king. Of course, no one explicitely asked the king to step aside (it was an absolute monarchy, after all, and no one liked the idea of Bastille's hospitality), but the ideological seeds of revolt were here.

      Unless I'm wrong, Lafayette appeared impressed by U.S. independance, and is supposed to have talked Louis XVI about that. The fact is Louis XVI was the living (soon to be dead) proof monarchy is a ridiculous idea. In fact, the people's will was ignored by both the noble and religious caste.

      U.S. Independance served, perhaps, as a proof it could work, but it WAS NOT the inspiration for the French Revolution.

      One last thing: Louis XIV was guillotined not because he was King, but because of high treason: He had conspired against the constitutional monarchy that had been installed since 1789 by the national assembly. He had conspired with the other european monarchs, to get back his throne.

      When all Europe invaded France to put back the king (that is, a decade more or less before Napoleon politely returned the gesture), Republic was declared in september 1792.

      For more information: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_France

    24. Re:Quick French Lesson For Posters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So I guess the distro wars are getting tighter, Ubuntu just surrendered...

      Would you have liked a more positive Mission accomplished?
      I didn't think so...
      ; )

    25. Re:Quick French Lesson For Posters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "French oil companies had secured extremely lucrative deal in Iraq prior to the invasion" ah oui the Food for Oil Scam which allowed Saddam to setup nice little estates all over the country while his playboy sons banged "cute" French whores in Paris. In the mean time Saddam's people went without even the basics like drinkable water.

    26. Re:Quick French Lesson For Posters by Nutria · · Score: 1
      Clinton did not "pretty much ignore Iraq",

      You're right. He ignored Islamofascism. (But the Republicans would have also.)

      They said he was trying to "wag the dog" and that there wasn't a real threat from Saddam, it was all just hype

      You are referring to Clinton shooting some cruise missiles at Sudan and Afghanistan 3 days after his finger-wagging "I have not had sexual relations with that woman" speech and the day of his Grand Jury (which he lied to and was thus disbarred) testimony, and was a throw-back to the movie /Canadian Bacon/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0109370/).


      --
      "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
    27. Re:Quick French Lesson For Posters by stephanruby · · Score: 1

      3. Nobody reacted when he gazed Kurds in the 80's.

      The entire World reacted when he gassed the Kurds, including France. It's just that most Americans do not know that. The gassing of the Kurds made the *front page* of Le Monde, and probably the front page of every major newspaper in the World (except the US).

      At the time, the US even defended Iraq casting doubts on Iraq's culpability, promising a veto in the Security Council against any sanction against Iraq, and even after the scandal broke out worldwide -- the US (Donald Rumsfeld) still loaned Saddam one billion dollars in aid which was never paid back (at the time, Donald Rumsfeld was Reagan's special envoy to Saddam Hussein).

      The US had a "grand vision" of the middle east (getting rid of dictators, bringing democracy and western values, securing this major oil source). the French government didn't share it and they wanted to protect their own interests. Both failed miserably.

      Nice summary, but you're still basically repeating what you've heard on American television. The French people still had a bad taste in its mouth from the War in Algeria. If anything, this was the big stumbling block in France, France had already been attacked on its home soil by Algerian terrorists. France had already tried shock and awe, it had already tried monetary rewards, kidnapping, torturing, and killing thousands of suspects and random people in Algeria -- just to try to get a little bit of information on those terrorist networks. And that didn't work -- none of it worked. Instead, France just gave up, repatriated all the Algerians that had collaborated with France, otherwise they would have all been killed if they had staid, and voila. France was humiliated, but at least it came out a little wiser for the next time around.

    28. Re:Quick French Lesson For Posters by ccp · · Score: 1

      France were quite content to look the other way on Saddam Hussein's atrocities because they had a nice trade relationship with him. They were widely criticized for this "cheese eating surrender monkey" approach.

      They may heve been criticized by a bunch if hicks in the US.
      The rest of the world just agreed with them.

      Cheers,
    29. Re:Quick French Lesson For Posters by tnk1 · · Score: 1

      This is quite an arrogant statement, ignoring both historical facts and philosophical works of that time.


      And that was quite an arrogant reply, ignoring, or perhaps blissfully unaware of the fact that the original comment was not meant to be informational, but amusing. It seems that some people's radar for "arrogant American comments" is turned up a little too high. I guess I'm just glad I have people like you to reply, anonymously, with summaries of the French Revolution and its causes so that you can display your prodigious recollection of your high school history class notes. Or perhaps you want me to read the wikipedia article that you so very carefully edited to remove the incorrectly placed semi-colons.

      I will be certain to make sure that my next joke is perhaps aimed at China, so you can explain to me the in depth reasons for the failure of the Qing Dynasty in China. I've always been a fan of the Kievan Rus... perhaps I can make joke about Russian mail order brides and get a brief tirade about that. I know Wikipedia has articles on those topics as well I just needed someone to give me the links so I can be edified.

      Dork.
  3. who ever thought... by physicsboy500 · · Score: 0, Insightful

    the French would get something right?!?

    --
    The original generic sig.
    1. Re:who ever thought... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess that makes 3 things, huh, dumbass?

  4. Cool by archeopterix · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Ok, Yet Another Visible Organization chooses Ubuntu, joy & bliss. I'm curious whether they plan to contribute - bug reports, patches, new features/apps maybe?

    Frubuntu anyone? :-)

    1. Re:Cool by Azathfeld · · Score: 1

      I'm curious how long it'll be before this Yet Another Visible Organization Drops Ubuntu.

    2. Re:Cool by creepynut · · Score: 1

      Let's just show France we appreciate their support and tag the article blamefrance.

    3. Re:Cool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think that would be expecting a lot, but if any organization chooses a linux distro, then it is in thier best interest to report any problems that happen during deployment. That alone would at least contribute something.

    4. Re:Cool by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm curious whether they plan to contribute - bug reports, patches, new features/apps maybe

      It is hard not to contribute while using Linux in a large organization. They've got several companies doing support and services for them and that is going to include solving bugs. If nothing else, I imagine they'll be contributing bug fixes to the french language support, which is good it being such a common language in many third world countries where Linux can be a boon.

    5. Re:Cool by Dan+Ost · · Score: 1

      Out of curiosity, which visible organizations have dropped Ubuntu?

      --

      *sigh* back to work...
    6. Re:Cool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm curious whether they plan to contribute - bug reports, patches, new features/apps maybe?

      This is a topic I often hear... But this is not what OSS is about. It sure is nice when some organization who profits from OSS gives back something. But to me the mere fact that the organization is using OSS is giving back to the OSS "community" (if you want to call it like this).

      I've heard one of the OO.o developer saying, about a french organization rolling on thousands and thousands of OO.o on desktops systems: "They could at least give us 1 Euro per version they install, it's nothing compared to what MS Office would have cost them."

      But it's 100% wrong to think this way. OSS is free. You've got nothing to give back. You give if you want. And you don't it doesn't matter, for others will (the myriad of independant developers, but also the big names like Sun, IBM, Oracle, etc.).

      Besides that, in Europe the move to OO.o is quite simply incredible: I see it happenning in political parties HQ, in hospitals (there are incredible medical imaging applications managing gigonstrous (yeah, I know...) amount of data that only run on Unix systems, including Linux... Apparently some other system has some problems scaling ;), in SMEs, etc.

      Many of my friends now use the term "Office" interchangeable for "MS Office" and for "Open Office".

      Certain kind of software (like an office suite), will prove much harder to sell to anyone but the biggest corporations, where armies of monkeys are spitting out shitty macros to do reporting. And, sadly for companies manufacturing such software, big companies are dwarfed in purchasing power by SMEs and individuals (said individuals and SMEs are also much more concerned by cost savings, which is helping spreading the OO.o adoption like fire).

      Sun pulled a very nice move by buying Applixware and making OO.o free.

      Sun on one side and Google apps on the other: Steve Ballmer jette beaucoup de chaises par la fenetre ;)

    7. Re:Cool by 14CharUsername · · Score: 1

      Yeah Linux will take over all those desktops in Haiti, Algeria and the Congo. This is a market that MS can't afford to lose.

    8. Re:Cool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just saving millions of euros of the tax payers?

  5. Two Years From Now They'll Switch Back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Two years from now the parliament will be switching back. This is going to cost them thousands in retraining fees, and cause headaches when their users say, "but I used to be able to do this in windows," and "why do you mean we can't run vendor xyz's software on our computers?"

    This should be interesting, but I ultimately think it will just set them back a couple of years.

  6. trying to get a deal from MS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    just another gov't trying to get favorable pricing from Microsoft.

    1. Re:trying to get a deal from MS by ThePhilips · · Score: 1

      Not in this case I think. Do not forget that we are talking about French here. And bureaucracy.

      It is more along populist lines: "We are using computers provided by local vendors! We are not using evil software from convicted *US* monopolist!! We are saving bunch of your tax payers' money!!!"

      I mean, they have elections looming. And I think it is part of campaign to get support from local business.

      --
      All hope abandon ye who enter here.
    2. Re:trying to get a deal from MS by flyingfsck · · Score: 1

      Of course. It is all about not sending hard earned money to the US. Also, any other system, no matter what of wherefrom, will support French better than MS products.

      --
      Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
    3. Re:trying to get a deal from MS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not in this case I think. Do not forget that we are talking about French here. And bureaucracy.

      Translation: Yeah! Another occasion to masturbate at the french's expense.
      Note that french people are happy your phantasies about them provided you with physical pleasure. Really...

      It is more along populist lines: "We are using computers provided by local vendors! We are not using evil software from convicted *US* monopolist!! We are saving bunch of your tax payers' money!!!"

      Note exactly. The facts are:

      • Unbuntu is free, and open-sourced. Windows isn't. It can be seen as a viable capitalistic choice. In this, every capitalism supporter should agree with the decision.
      • Unbuntu is enough for what the french deputies need computers for.
      • Unbuntu has a cool name. Windows, well... Ahem...
      • Unbuntu has an idealistic flair the french are sensible about.
      • Microsoft is a monopolistic entity. The fact the U.S.A. decided to forget this does not change the fact the European Union did not.
      • The ties between Microsoft and the Bush Administration does not help, it's true. We're talking national security, here. Would you ask France Telecom to install the White House phone lines? No, I didn't think so...

      Strange thing that there is always people to feel unhappy when the french decide to use their freedom to make a sensible choice. Hey... You should be happy, both for Ubuntu, Linux and the french people, not the other way around...

      I mean, they have elections looming. And I think it is part of campaign to get support from local business.

      You should try not to view France's internal politics with U.S. colored lenses, you would then write less blatant mistakes.

      The truth is almost no one here in France really cares about the fact the deputies decided as a whole to install Ubuntu, or whatever. It was not a left-sided decision. It was not a right-sided decision. It was not a center-sided (!!!) decision. It's not even a government decision. The Assembly chose, alone, the software and hardware they work on. The support motivation you claim is nil as, currently, french IT is not in a crisis position, and IT companies are not in a position to influence french voters, either using the media, or using electronic vote machines...
      ; p

      No, actually what the french are really caring about today is the apparent rise of the center-sided (!!!) François Bayrou, against both left-sided S. Royal and N. Sarkozy.

  7. Yes, but knowing how governments are... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They may have passed a resolution "choosing Ubuntu", but I'll bet that most of the representatives probably think Ubuntu is a particular type of French grape grown only in the Camargue and processed by Monks of the Suse sect in Aix-en-Provence.

    1. Re:Yes, but knowing how governments are... by RalphTheWonderLlama · · Score: 1

      The Camaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrgue?

      --
      simple, fast homepage with your links: http://www.ngumbi.com/
  8. OT: Have anyone tried Wubi? by atamyrat · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I came across with Wubi - new Ubuntu installer for Windows. You don't have to burn CD nor create new partition.
    From FAQ:

    How does Wubi work?
    Wubi adds an entry to the Windows boot menu which allows you to run Linux. Ubuntu is installed within a file in the windows file system (c:\wubi\harddisks\ubuntu.hd), this file is seen by Linux as a real hard disk.
    How do I install Ubuntu?
    Run wubi, answer the few questions, reboot and select "Ubuntu" from the boot menu, go grab a coffee and when you are back Ubuntu will be ready for you.
    How do I uninstall it?
    You uninstall it as any other applications. In windows go to the control panel and select "Add or Remove Programs", then select Wubi and uninstall it. You can also use the uninstaller that you find in C:\wubi\uninstaller.exe.
    1. Re:OT: Have anyone tried Wubi? by Bob54321 · · Score: 3, Funny

      I haven't tried Wubi but I'm guessing its similar to the Debain Installer that I tried. I never had any trouble with that. You've got to love the Ubuntu wiki and its use cases!

      --
      :(){ :|:& };:
  9. Re:Perfect matchup by dreamchaser · · Score: 4, Insightful

    While it's not my favorite distro, there are plenty of support options available for Ubuntu. Of course I'm pretty sure you knew that and just felt like tossing out a troll. The alternative is you're just daft.

  10. Re:Surprising choice by lixee · · Score: 1

    One word: Momentum!

    --
    Res publica non dominetur
  11. May I be an early welcomer......... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Of our frog-eating, garlic-flavoured open-sourced political masters ...?

  12. Actually it's a Microsoft conspiracy by SimonInOz · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I seem to recall, just a few years ago, Microsoft was declared in court as being a monopolist.
    Now as I understand it, that's not illegal as such. It is, however, to use a monopoly to manipulate other markets.

    So, ever so quietly, Microsoft is supporting Linux in general up to the point where Microsoft can no longer be seen as a monopoly.

    Then it can go back to its previous predatory practices, maniulate other markets merrily, and nobody can say a word.

    Have I got that right?

    (I mean, it wouldn't do to see this as good news, surely?)

    --
    "Cats like plain crisps"
    1. Re:Actually it's a Microsoft conspiracy by tomstdenis · · Score: 1

      Except Linux and OSS in general has a long way to go to push MSFT out of the monopoly role.

      And by time OSS does that, it may have a strong enough foothold to undo MSFT anyways.

      Tom

      --
      Someday, I'll have a real sig.
    2. Re:Actually it's a Microsoft conspiracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (I mean, it wouldn't do to see this as good news, surely?)

      No, it wouldn't. Example:

      • U.S.A uses Linux !
        • This is the proof capitalism works
        • This is another victory against terrorism
        • Proud to be american !
        • A small step for U.S., a great step for mankind !
        • Good work !
      • Germany uses Linux !
        • Yeah !
        • Cool !
        • Itch B33n a B3rl1n1r !
        • Fuc|< M$ !!!
        • Lucky germans !
      • France uses Linux !
        • Cowards !
        • French victories/defeats !
        • Paris Sux !
        • Must be a M$ conspiracy
        • Stupid french !
        • I wouldn't work as an IT in France !

      More seriously (yeah, despite the silly example above): Apparently, the country were the event is happening seems a lot more important than the event itself. Am I wrong?

      I don't think so...
      Apparently, any french-topic appearing on [/.], be it good or bad, sad or funny, will be an excuse for self-satisfactory french-bashing.
      :o/

  13. Set them back a couple of years... by symbolset · · Score: 1
    Since there haven't been any real advancements in Microsoft software in several years, this is no change at all. Unless you consider the savings. Why would a government consider that?

    A new desktop theme is not an operating systems revolution.

    --
    Help stamp out iliturcy.
    1. Re:Set them back a couple of years... by harry666t · · Score: 1

      A new desktop theme is not an operating systems revolution.


      Microsoft says different with their aero.
    2. Re:Set them back a couple of years... by Chemicalscum · · Score: 1
      Microsoft says different with their aero.

      Let them eat Beryl

    3. Re:Set them back a couple of years... by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      Since there haven't been any real advancements in Microsoft software in several years, this is no change at all.

      I'm not sure you could say that MS has been advancing faster than Linux, but there are real advancements in Vista, whether you care about them or not.

      Unless you consider the savings. Why would a government consider that?

      I'm sure the french have considered a great many aspects of Linux vs. Windows for their needs. Basically, it comes down to the needs they have, the cost of meeting those needs, the risk of changing or not changing, and the long term flexibility and probable costs/risks associated with it. For large companies and organizations, Linux is looking pretty good in some of those comparisons (especially the last item). You never want a single supplier for something critical to your infrastructure and the more people that move to anything not Windows, the more benefit there is to doing the same.

    4. Re:Set them back a couple of years... by Nutria · · Score: 1
      I'm not sure you could say that MS has been advancing faster than Linux, but there are real advancements in Vista, whether you care about them or not.

      I'm sure there are advancements over the NT5/XP codebase, but what does Vista (not MSO, or SQL Server or Exchange) do better than Linux?

      --
      "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
    5. Re:Set them back a couple of years... by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      but what does Vista (not MSO, or SQL Server or Exchange) do better than Linux?

      Well, I never actually claimed that Windows was better at anything than Linux, only that the Versions of Windows available today are better than the version available two years ago. Vista adds indexed searching, more granular control of sound, the UI utilizes the GPU to offload some work, etc. As for areas where Windows is ahead of Linux and OS X, I maintain a running list of the advantages of each platform over the others, which I've posted on Slashdot several times and added to and modified as a result. Right now the Windows platform wins are:

      • Application availability - more developers target Windows and eventually a lot of people want to run some niche software that does not work without Windows
      • hardware vendors - If you run Windows you have more hardware choices and likely get a machine that meets your needs more cheaply than a Mac or Linux, as a result. (How many choices for Linux laptops do you have where everything works?)
      • Package manager - Windows has a pretty lame software install/uninstall manager, but it is still better than nothing and is the king for supporting commercial, closed source developers.
      • Antivirus/phishing features - OS X and Linux don't have a lot of need, but this is still not a bad precaution
      • Remote desktop features - have clients for more platforms than OS X's comparable feature, and is better than Linux for a few tasks, but worse for others.
      • Wider support for third party devices, everyone makes a Windows driver, not everyone makes an OS X or Linux driver
      • Easier to find unofficial support from random people you know
      • Indexed searching is useable by default
      • Default color support has poorer management and accuracy, but wider range

      Note, I don't go into the reasons for said advantages, which is another discussion. Please feel free to comment and mention any other areas where Windows wins or loses, but only if you actually use both platforms enough to have an educated viewpoint. I'm dog tired of people bringing up some "advantage" of their favorite OS when they don't even know the state of that same technology on other platforms. Also note "Linux" is not a single platform, so different distros have different features and it is impossible to evaluate them all. I look at a few common distributions and the default setting enabled as they affect home users (I know this article was about centrally managed use which is somewhat different).

    6. Re:Set them back a couple of years... by symbolset · · Score: 1
      Ok, this is /., so let's get pedantic.

      # Application availability - more developers target Windows and eventually a lot of people want to run some niche software that does not work without Windows

      Apps available in Linux are capable of all the work that needs to be done. That they don't trap you into supporting an old unobtanium DOS 5.0 machine until it wheezes its last and brings down your enterprise for lack of replacement is not a drawback. Try the sourceforge link at the top of the page.

      # hardware vendors - If you run Windows you have more hardware choices and likely get a machine that meets your needs more cheaply than a Mac or Linux, as a result. (How many choices for Linux laptops do you have where everything works?)

      Linux supports more devices than any other operating system ever. Multiple vendors offer and support laptops at reasonable prices.

      # Package manager - Windows has a pretty lame software install/uninstall manager, but it is still better than nothing and is the king for supporting commercial, closed source developers.

      Permissions for the Windows package manager allow any installer to install absolutely anything, including a root kit. This is not desirable behavior in a package manager.

      # Antivirus/phishing features - OS X and Linux don't have a lot of need, but this is still not a bad precaution

      Having an ecosystem that supports competing malware/antimalware solutions is not an advantage, not on my planet.

      # Remote desktop features - have clients for more platforms than OS X's comparable feature, and is better than Linux for a few tasks, but worse for others.

      Better in some ways, worse in others, advantage Windows? Huh? Did I read that right?

      # Wider support for third party devices, everyone makes a Windows driver, not everyone makes an OS X or Linux driver

      Second time for this old troll.

      # Easier to find unofficial support from random people you know

      You know the wrong people. This is changing fast, and is probably already better than you think.

      # Indexed searching is useable by default

      locate works for me. I don't know what the gui dependent use, but I'm sure there's something.

      In short, all of your "windows advantages" are either old info or just plain wrong. Maybe it's time to get current?

      --
      Help stamp out iliturcy.
    7. Re:Set them back a couple of years... by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      Apps available in Linux are capable of all the work that needs to be done.

      Sorry, this is a poor argument. First, it doesn't matter if there is an application that can do every task, that still is not good enough. More applications means more functions and more workflows for doing those functions. That means I have a better chance of finding an application that does just what I want just how I want to do it. In any case, there certainly are not good replacements on Linux for many proprietary software packages written for Windows. I run Linux side by side with Windows and OS X every day, but a lot of the applications I use because they are best of breed for some task do not run, or only run in a semi-stable re-implementation of the Windows API on Linux. This is a real issue for a lot of us who actually have to work in the real world and exchange data with others.

      Linux supports more devices than any other operating system ever. Multiple vendors offer and support laptops at reasonable prices.

      Basically every manufacturer of laptops in the world supports Windows on their hardware including drivers. I can pick any one. Maybe half of them have proper Linux drivers. That means I have half as many choices and thus the perfect laptop from a cost/feature/hardware perspective may not work if I'm running Linux, and so I have to buy a more expensive one with features I don't need in order to run Linux. This is a real disadvantage.

      Linux wins on hardware support for old systems and systems with lesser resources, but not in the above.

      Permissions for the Windows package manager allow any installer to install absolutely anything, including a root kit. This is not desirable behavior in a package manager.

      Actually this is true for some Linux distros as well, but that is not the main issue. Package management on Linux, in general, is much better than Windows or OS X, but Linux package management is behind in providing commercial developers with the functions and incentive needed to get them to use the Linux package managers instead of bypassing them to the detriment of users. This is a small win for Windows in a category where they are mostly behind, but it is a win.

      Having an ecosystem that supports competing malware/antimalware solutions is not an advantage, not on my planet.

      No, having an ecosystem that lends itself to malware is a big loss I have chalked up to Windows, but having the ability to easily find and remove malware (which is admittedly rare on Linux) is a small win for Windows, again in a category where they are mostly losing.

      Better in some ways, worse in others, advantage Windows? Huh? Did I read that right?

      This is a list of where each OS is ahead of others. The fact that they are ahead in some remote desktop type functions is a win for Windows. This same item is also listed for Linux to account for the items where it does better. By keeping the list positive and giving each OS credit for each way they are ahead we avoid pointless comparisons of which feature set is "better overall" which is of course pointless since it all depends on a given user's use case. Yes, this is a win for Windows and Linux.

      Second time for this old troll.

      Anyone who denies that third party devices and peripherals are more likely to be supported on Windows, is living in a fantasy world. Why is it that zealots feel so emotionally entangled with their OS that they can't admit to areas where it is deficient. In this case it has little or nothing to do with the OS itself, simply with the current market and how that influences the behavior of hardware manufacturers. That makes it no less true and someone looking for the best OS for some purpose should be accurately informed about these things. Does it somehow make you less of a man if a random Web-cam from Walmart is less likely to work on Linux than Windows?

      Y

  14. Re:Perfect matchup by mushadv · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Well-done troll, except Canonical does indeed provide paid support. Also, I fail to realize how sodomy plays a role in this wonderful distro, but I'm not one to judge based on the omission of a few pesky facts. "Don't complain, fix it" is my philosophy. Great job!

  15. FRENCH PARLIAMENT CHOOSES TERRORISM!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What will you tell your children when they ask you why using an operating system that was free and therefore obviously developed by terrorists was more fun than using Windows?

    What will your children think when they hear that terrorism had won because you installed VMware to make dual boot less annoying?

    The future of the world is in your hands!

    1. Re:FRENCH PARLIAMENT CHOOSES TERRORISM!!! by nospam007 · · Score: 0, Troll

      What will you tell your children when they ask you why using an operating system that was free and therefore obviously developed by terrorists was more fun than using Windows?
      --
      We'll tell them that we changed the fries on parliament menu to "Ubuntu Fries" as revenge.

  16. Glad I don't do my IT work in France by steelcobra · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Because the first year of real bureaucratic workers using only Linux will be hell.

    1. Re:Glad I don't do my IT work in France by iworm · · Score: 2, Funny

      "Glad I don't do my IT work in France"

      So are the French.

    2. Re:Glad I don't do my IT work in France by ThePhilips · · Score: 1

      Not true. If applications do fit the purpose - it would be fine. And since they have backing of two consulting agencies, I hope they know what they do. I mean, somebody lobbied for the deal, someone sweetened the deal to the point of acceptance.

      [ I know people who moved bureaucracy to Linux - it was bit involuntary move when power failure fried bunch of hard drives 5(6?) years ago. IT gave three of their old Linux servers to department so that they would at least be able to work in Web interface. And people liked Netscape more than they liked IE. So several (junk) computers there still run Linux and people use them solely for intranet portals. Anyway they really need only two Windows computers there since company has bought only two licenses for Windows book keeping software. Rest of work is done on home brew Web inranet. IIRC crucial factor of accepting Linux was availability of - and that's NOT joke - mahjong. ]

      Though I too share your concerns. I really hope those two providers know what they are subscribing themselves to. But if people need only to access some web portals & KOffice/OpenOffice.org fit the bill for productivity software - why not to try?

      --
      All hope abandon ye who enter here.
    3. Re:Glad I don't do my IT work in France by nick.ian.k · · Score: 1

      Because the first year of real bureaucratic workers using only Linux will be hell.

      Why? Is it because you don't understand Linux, or is it because you think that they'll be doing something requiring a vastly different set of knowledge?

      If it's the latter, you're probably being foolish. What complex tasks are bureaucrats going to be left to that require Linux-specific knowledge on their behalf? Sending and receiving email? Viewing web pages? Reading and writing office documents? These are not Linux-centric tasks. Unless they're being asked to perform system administration themselves (which would be ridiculous, this isn't their job), it's very likely everything will be fine.

      If it's the former, fair enough. Someone else -likely a person with the appropriate set of skills living in France- will take the job and do just fine.

      Really, what's the problem?

    4. Re:Glad I don't do my IT work in France by steelcobra · · Score: 1

      Once you've had a chance to actually deal with real-world users in the government enterprise environment, you know exactly what I mean. Linux is a great solution if every user has a basic grip on how to use a computer and are willing to explore and figure out how to do things. But in the real world, most aren't. And the higher up they are, the more they need assistance in learning the basics of new software. I guarantee that the oldest/most senior users in the french government are going to call IT every time they want to do something they weren't shown how to do, or simply forgot or became too tech-timid, when they were set up with Ubuntu. Despite the fact that "OMG Windoze wantz to rulez world so it suckz" seems to be the normal opinion here, Windows XP is a solid OS with a familiar feel and, most importantly, real support from a massive dev team. As oppossed to a group of nerds who just don't want to pay for software so they build a modified version of Unix for themselves.

    5. Re:Glad I don't do my IT work in France by howlingmadhowie · · Score: 1

      so the thousands of companies and government departments worldwide already using linux don't count for some reason.

    6. Re:Glad I don't do my IT work in France by nick.ian.k · · Score: 1

      I guarantee that the oldest/most senior users in the french government are going to call IT every time they want to do something they weren't shown how to do, or simply forgot or became too tech-timid, when they were set up with Ubuntu. Despite the fact that "OMG Windoze wantz to rulez world so it suckz" seems to be the normal opinion here, Windows XP is a solid OS with a familiar feel and, most importantly, real support from a massive dev team. As oppossed to a group of nerds who just don't want to pay for software so they build a modified version of Unix for themselves.

      Your implication that "real" support does not exist for Ubuntu is utter bullshit, as Canonical sells support for it. And from a wider perspective, if the alleged computer incompetents are in fact present, chances are they'd be phoning IT up for everything regardless of the OS being used.

      Are you just upset because a solution that you either don't advocate or are not familiar with might get deployed by an IT department somewhere else in the world, or do you just like to complain about Linux because a lot of people advocate it a bit too noisily? Either's fairly childish. Don't give yourself a heart-attack.

    7. Re:Glad I don't do my IT work in France by nick.ian.k · · Score: 1

      Just realized that the "support" referenced is specifically stated as "support from a massive dev team" and thus is different from what I was talking about. This is a mistake on my part. The implication is still ridiculous, though, because the Ubuntu devs tend to do a fine job in terms of package maintenance. Things rarely get broken, and when they are broken, they get fixed quickly. Bugs get patched regularly. That's not so different from Microsoft's way of doing things, except the process is a bit more transparent. When it's necessary, being able to follow what's going on with development as it happens should be looked at as a benefit.

    8. Re:Glad I don't do my IT work in France by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 2, Informative

      Once you've had a chance to actually deal with real-world users in the government enterprise environment, you know exactly what I mean. Linux is a great solution if every user has a basic grip on how to use a computer and are willing to explore and figure out how to do things. But in the real world, most aren't.

      Actually, I think Linux is a lot better for this than Windows is. I've seen incompetent management types who can only access files from the "most recent" list in Word and have no idea where their files are stored or even what the whole file/folder metaphor is about. The difference is, with Linux it is fairly easy to customize the interface such that the tasks a user needs to accomplish are mapped directly to big buttons that are omnipresent and it is possible to make the one hundred random controls that those user don't ever want to touch, invisible by default. Remember we're talking about deploying in a centrally managed environment. Rolling out software and patches and even doing remote support tasks is a lot easier using Linux than Windows.

      I guarantee that the oldest/most senior users in the french government are going to call IT every time they want to do something they weren't shown how to do, or simply forgot or became too tech-timid, when they were set up with Ubuntu.

      Sure they will, and they'd do the same thing if they were upgraded to a newer version of Windows. The difference is the ease of accommodating them.

      Despite the fact that "OMG Windoze wantz to rulez world so it suckz" seems to be the normal opinion here...

      This is a strawman argument. No one but you said Windows sucks.

      Windows XP is a solid OS with a familiar feel...

      A "familiar feel" is an argument against all change. Change can be difficult and has real costs, but sometimes those costs are outweighed by other factors.

      ...most importantly, real support from a massive dev team.

      Umm, Ubuntu probably has more professional, paid developers working on it than Windows does. Trying to get a flaw in Windows fixed is an exercise in frustration. Unless you are huge, good luck. You can wait till service pack 3 or the next release of Windows in another 5 years. Trying to get the same flaw fixed in Ubuntu is a matter of calling one of the two support companies that are part of this contract, or Canonical, or another Linux distro, or getting an internal employee to fix it, or hiring an independent contractor because all of those are options and have access to the source. Better yet, you can take competitive bids from all of them to see who will work most cheaply, and the same applies for new features of customizations.

      Getting real support for Windows is a matter of hiring a company who will solve what they can without the source and pester MS on your behalf and hope for the best. That is the inferior support option.

      As oppossed to a group of nerds who just don't want to pay for software so they build a modified version of Unix for themselves.

      Are you smoking crack? Do you even know any Linux developers? Most of them work for IBM or Redhat or Motorola or Home Depot, or one of thousands of other companies that use Linux as a component of their business model. Heck we submit fixes and improvements to Linux all the time and not because Linux is license free, but because it was the best fit for our project and because customers demanded it. In fact some of our projects ran on BSD variants until customers demanded Linux for greater customizability with tools they were familiar with. Since the cheapest box we sell is about $40K, adding another couple hundred for an OS license is not really a significant expense if it had any benefits. It doesn't and has significant negatives.

      The French parliament has two professional services companies for support and they are professional coders. They can buy support from Cano

    9. Re:Glad I don't do my IT work in France by MeNeXT · · Score: 1

      This is flame bait but I have time to waste....Windows XP is a solid OS which requires anti-virus, anti-spyware with a familiar feel get with the times, you need to upgrade to Vista, and, most importantly, real support from a massive dev team I would like that number because the numbers that I have get me support and not the dev team. What is it as of today? 8 0 day security issues not patched?

      Real world users don't care which OS you use. Reminds me of the time when I worked for a major chain of Hotels. They created a budget on Excel and used macros which were only supported on the most current version. They spent weeks denigrating the users before they realized it wasn't the users. Users don't care. If they can get the job done with less time they just don't care. They don't care for anti-virus software. In some cases they don't get paid overtime to wait for the system to finish the scan. If you care about the environment you don't leave your system running. If you don't leave your system running you waste time with the stupid scan./rant

      I've never had a user complain that they were lost on a properly configured system, Be it Windows, Mac, Linux, or FreeBSD. I have had complaints that people couldn't open a specific file because they did not have the right software for it and this was regardless of what OS they were using. If you base your operations on standards then you will never have these issues. Defacto is not a standard. Doc is not a standard it doesn't render properly even when using Microsoft products let alone third party products. It's your choice to limit yourself, it's mine not to.

      --
      DRM? No thanks, I'll just get it somewhere else...
    10. Re:Glad I don't do my IT work in France by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From my experience with real-world users, you are only correct for a specific subgroup of users (and what you mean by "real support from a massive dev team", I have no idea what you're referring to...).

      For most basic users, ranging from computer-illiterate to semi-comfortable, the environment doesn't make much of a difference, as long as it's set up by someone else. They'll be able to perform their basic tasks, and be fairly happy with whatever they are given, with occasional guidance from people with more experience.

      For slightly more advanced users, they'll require a bit of adjustment to the differences between the environments, and they might complain for a while, but that's just because they're used to slightly different conventions. They might bug IT support every now and then.

      Then there's the group that will truly suffer from the change...the half-experts, who are power-users of Microsoft's products specifically, but don't understand computers in general. They'll hate the change.

      Obviously there are also genuinely computer literate people, who will be able to use whatever is thrown at them without help, and who may or may not complain initially that they have to change, but manage just fine in any case.

      But it's natural that changing things always generates some friction. But do you genuinely believe that the world is better only using Microsoft's operating system and office suite, for all eternity? Because if you argue that nobody should change because they're most comfortable with what they know, then the only way any competitor could ever hope to compete with Microsoft is to emulate their behavior almost exactly (and note that this is currently happening to some extent). Are Microsoft's products somehow so great that they deserve to control the market entirely?

      I'm not an advocate for the elimination of Microsoft products. I wouldn't complain about Microsoft if they had less than, say, 70% market share. Sometimes they do good things, sometimes bad. But the fact that people choose Microsoft's products simply because "that's what everyone is familiar with" indicates that the market is completely distorted, which is bad for everyone (except Microsoft).

  17. why not ORACLE linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    why not ORACLE enterprise linux??? you would imagine support would matter - well, oracle should be able to give support.

    1. Re:why not ORACLE linux? by corwin2 · · Score: 1

      Because there are tons of local companies specialized in giving support to OSS, the two companies that won the bid (Linagora and Unilog) are services companies.

  18. Re:Perfect matchup by Knuckles · · Score: 1

    From the attitude of the OP troll I would guess he calls it "sodomy" if people of different skin color hug each other, or when people of the same sex do. (Remember the outcry 2 years ago about their theme photo, http://www.javipas.com/wp-content/ubuntu.JPG)

    --
    "When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
  19. Re:Surprising choice by corwin2 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'd have expected a French governmental institute to have chosen a good French product like Mandriva over an British on like Ubuntu (Conanical Ltd. is registered in the Isle of Man). Those French do so love their protectionism at the expense of flexibility and a fair market, after all.
    It may also mean that your view of the French mindset is not totally accurate ? ;)
  20. Just a random thought about SUSE/Microsoft/patents by Tokimasa · · Score: 0

    I'm still trying to put my stand into words. I'm for software patents, for open-source, and not against closed-source.

    --
    --Thomas J. Owens
  21. Good stuff by RoiDaGaubert · · Score: 3, Informative

    I'm french and for once proud to be :-p

    Obviously that the only good decision that the french gouvernement took for a long while ....

    1. Re:Good stuff by RoiDaGaubert · · Score: 1

      Just wonder if they will use XGL :))

    2. Re:Good stuff by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're french but you seem to forget that this decision isn't a consequence of any government policy, or decision. The National Assembly has its own way of making decision, and in particular, the decision to switch to linux was taken by Assembly representatives, elected by deputies amongst other deputies. Point is: if you're looking for a nice decision from France's government, look elsewhere. I might point you (and other interested slashdot readers), to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_of_France Please notice the strange separation between the executive branch and the legislative branch.

  22. New machines? by problem+for+Wolf · · Score: 1

    Why do they have to purchase new machines? I bet Ubuntu will run just fine on their current equipment.

    1. Re:New machines? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      because they have to destroy the old ones.

  23. Defenestration in action.... by advocate_one · · Score: 1

    just watch out for chairs though... ;)

    --
    Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
  24. Behind the scenes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It seems that the deal clincher was that Linagora and Unilog promised to integrate a surrender button so essential to French diplomacy in each computer provided.

  25. None by Per+Abrahamsen · · Score: 1

    The French parliament is obviously not going to submit patches. The companies they have hired to provide local support might submit patches that makes their support job easier, but those will just come in through the normal patch stream, and not be obviously linked to the parliament.

  26. Re: separation of powers by neutrino38 · · Score: 1

    You might now that this kind of decision is taken internally to the French Parliament. They have their own independent budget (that they vote for themselves) and governement has no right whatsoever to interfere with this.

    It's an implementation the the principle of separation of powers

    (Voltaire or Montesquieu ?).

    So you can't even give credit to govt for this decision.

  27. The neoconservatives in Texas by Billly+Gates · · Score: 1

    Will be bashing all Ubuntu linux users next as unAmerican. .... well at least the ones I know about

    1. Re:The neoconservatives in Texas by Nutria · · Score: 1
      Will those neo-cons actually find out that the French Assembly is dumping Windows for Ubuntu?

      --
      "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
  28. They have a choice by Locklin · · Score: 1

    Send X% of I.T. budget to the U.S., and spend the remaining 100-X% paying local people for support OR Spend 100% of budget paying local service people/companies (This is government remember). I assume they probably chose Ubuntu because it isn't also tied to support contracts with Redhad and Novell (ie. They can support it locally if they wish). I'm curious, what would be the downsides of chosing Ubuntu for this purpose?

    --
    "Knowledge is the only instrument of production that is not subject to diminishing returns" -Journal of Political Econom
    1. Re:They have a choice by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      the main downsides of ubuntu

      it effectively exists on the whim of one rich guy who could lose interest and kill it whenever he wanted.

      apparently the creaks are already showing in dapper (one person above mentioned downloading an update and his gui suddenly breaking with no availible soloution) and its less than a third of the way through its supposed support cycle. Support for the less major software in universe is even worse (much of the stuff in there has simply been imported straight from debian with no testing if it actually works in the ubuntu environment).

      iirc long term support releases are supposed to come every two years and are finally obsoleted completely after 5 years. Maybe i'll be convinced when they have 3 of them in support at once (two for the desktop, 3 for the server) and are doing a good job for all of them i'll be convinced, until then ubuntu must be regarded as a young and vulnerable distro.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    2. Re:They have a choice by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      ...it effectively exists on the whim of one rich guy who could lose interest and kill it whenever he wanted.

      Remember we're comparing to Windows. So long as the French parliament is willing to pay for support, I doubt they'll have trouble finding a company to provide it (they have 2 now unrelated to Canonical). Also, since Ubuntu is Linux, migrating to another Linux distro can be invisible to users and result in very little change other than the build process. This is less of a risk than Windows moving in a direction incompatible with the needs of the parliament.

      apparently the creaks are already showing in dapper (one person above mentioned downloading an update and his gui suddenly breaking with no availible soloution) and its less than a third of the way through its supposed support cycle.

      Umm, Dapper isn't even the stable version, is it? In any case, we're looking at this for a centrally managed solution, not a home user. No one rolls out random updates with no testing when they are supporting hundreds of machines. This simply is not a real issue for such a deployment.

      Support for the less major software in universe is even worse (much of the stuff in there has simply been imported straight from debian with no testing if it actually works in the ubuntu environment).

      Again, this is still better than Windows where installing random software in Vista may or may not work and may or may not hose your system or infect it with something. In a centrally managed situation, supported by both internal IT and a third party support company, if software is needed for these machines, it probably needs to be approved, then a test box is setup to see if it works, then it either goes back to the support company who fixes it or gets rolled out to some or all users. This is almost the same with Windows in a centrally managed environment, except if there is a broken interaction between the OS and the application, the support team has the ability to fix it in the OS, which is not the case with Windows.

      ...until then ubuntu must be regarded as a young and vulnerable distro.

      All distros are young at some point, but it is not the age that is important but the level of commitment and adoption. There are plenty of old Linux distros that used to be popular but no longer are and which now suck to support because no one tests against them when developing software. Sometimes it pays to be part of the main mass, and Ubuntu is that right now. You speak as though all the support options rested on the shoulders of Canonical, but that is simply not true. For any distro, most of the work comes from outside companies. The two hired by the French parliament will likely be contributing a significant amount on their behalf and making support better for everyone. The more companies do this, the fewer problems everyone has. Such a mass is important to how well supported a Linux distro is and is a lot more important, IMHO, than how old it is.

    3. Re:They have a choice by petermgreen · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Umm, Dapper isn't even the stable version, is it?
      edgy is not a long term support release, support for it will be discontinued in a relatively short timeframe and its reported to be ubuntus buggiest release to date.

      You speak as though all the support options rested on the shoulders of Canonical, but that is simply not true
      do any of those companies have the rescources and inclination to do thier own tracking on what security issues pertain to what ubuntu versions and backport those security fixes themselves if ubuntus long term support promises turn out to be hollow?

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
  29. Not Part of The UK by andersh · · Score: 2, Informative

    Did you know that the Isle of Mann is NOT part of the UK or the EU? In other words not very "British" at all ;)

    1. Re:Not Part of The UK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Crown territory, UK protectorate, EEC member and only just scraps out of the EU freedom of movement legislation on a wing and a prayer. No, I guess you get my on a technicality.

  30. Now Linux is ready... by tsbiscaro · · Score: 0

    ...to lose the OS war!

  31. Or go for the national ? by DrYak · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Or go for the local national stuff, like Mandriva / Mandrake ?
    As opposed to the south-african origins of ubuntu, german origins of SuSE and american origins of RedHat

    (Although I personally prefere SuSE's YaST to Mandriva's DrakConf. But public backing could boost sales of the distro and help finance more work on the config tools)

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
  32. Actually... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Actually the clincher was removing all of the false evidence of WMDs that could lead the US to attack them. After all the French can expect the Americans to attack almost anything that moves nowadays. I guess they really regret supporting those nasty rebels in the British Colonies, it has certainly not served the world well. God Save the Queen!

  33. It's all in the details by andersh · · Score: 1

    Of course, what did you expect from a law student? :D And as a Norwegian the Isle of Mann has a special place in our history. It was after all a Norwegian kingdom. Did you know Jeremy Clarkson of Top Gear fame lives there?

  34. Socialist Theory? by andersh · · Score: 2, Informative

    Okay, this is entertaining. Are you accusing the French of being socialists? France is ruled by the UMP a Conservative political party member of the International Democrat Union just like the US Republican Party!

    P.S. You are more likely to find sodomy in the halls of the U.S. Congress - where pages really know what pain in the ass means!

  35. Yeah but by nightsweat · · Score: 0

    They say it "Eu-bun-teu".

    --

    the major advances in civilization are processes which all but wreck the societies in which they occur - A.N. White
  36. Re:Surprising choice by Karnak23 · · Score: 1

    I too am surprised that Mandriva did not make the grade.

    As for an inaccurate view of the French mindset, I would posit that, none of us have a clear view of each others mindset on a personal level, much less a cultural level.

    Then again, the French government is the only one, outside of a George Orwell novel, that has an agency dedicated to "language purity".

  37. Re: separation of powers by xlv · · Score: 1

    It's an implementation the the principle of separation of powers
    (Voltaire or Montesquieu ?). Montesquieu.

    See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_Of_Powers or as we're talking about France: http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%C3%A9paration_des_p ouvoirs.

    I see you've got a French url in your profile so you should know that or don't they teach that stuff in High School over there any more :)

  38. Re:Surprising choice by pascalc · · Score: 1

    Then again, the French government is the only one, outside of a George Orwell novel, that has an agency dedicated to "language purity".

    Another urban legend :) Many countries have such an agency, for instance in Spain they have the Real Academia Espanola (equivalent to the French Académie française) and they also have the Instituto Cervantes (equivalent to French Alliance Française).

    The purpose of these agencies is mostly to make sure that the written language does not differ too much from a country to another one while the spoken French can be very different (I have difficulties understanding people from some regions of Québec or West-Africa for instance, but we write the exact same language unlike Brits and Americans who have languages clearly diverging).

    German is another example of a language with an even stronger "official" version, they had a huge language reform in the 80s/90s that went way beyond what the Académie Française ever did and which purpose was to normalize written German.

    See the Wikipedia list of languages with a regulation body, which is a looooon list : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_language_regu lators

  39. Legislators dictating IT usage? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Absurd.
    BTW, anyone notice that the only way that Linux can compete is thru government mandate?

  40. Re: separation of powers by neutrino38 · · Score: 2, Funny

    I see you've got a French url in your profile so you should know that or don't they teach that stuff in High School over there any more :)

    I am computer geek remember?. French or not I am not supposed to know anything before Jan 1, 1970.

    :)

  41. Re:Surprising choice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Those French do so love their protectionism at the expense of flexibility and a fair market, after all.

    Let's not forget that supposedly fair market loving Americans subsidize their cotton farmers with huge federal subsidies at the expense of African cotton farmers.

  42. Re:Surprising choice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As for an inaccurate view of the French mindset, I would posit that, none of us have a clear view of each others mindset on a personal level, much less a cultural level.

    I don't know why the french deputies choose Ubuntu, but it could be, for example:

    • The apparent ideals (the so-called Ubuntu philosophy)?
    • The apparent ease to use it, when compared with other distros or even Windows?
    • The fact it's open source?

    At least, it's some reasons I moved to Ubuntu recently. As I am french, perhaps it will enlighten you about "french mindset".

    You see, the french can be quite idealistic: Remember that time, when the same National Assembly almost voted for free download, before being beaten into submission by the senate and the french government?

    Then again, the French government is the only one, outside of a George Orwell novel, that has an agency dedicated to "language purity".

    George Orwell talked about a country whose government spied on its population, used war as a mean to control it, and used the media as propaganda vehicle, to make its lies appear like truth...

    Seems familiar, doesn't it?
    ; p

  43. Re:And here I though... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...that the French had an aversion to things normal people like! Apparently they like stuff besides snails, frog's legs, and French military defeats!

    Must I conclude from you half baked wrong arguments you are still pissed about being wrong about Irak?

    In the name of France, and all the french people, I say "We're sorry."

    Sorry for being right. Sorry for your not-so-funny comment. Sorry your life seem to be so miserable you need to hide it behind ill conceived contempt for the french.

    And believe us, if is there something the french are immune to, it is contempt... You see, arrogance is so much in our DNA and culture you'll need talent to even attract anything from us but smiling frowns of pity for the average disdainful comment. (I'm not speaking of your above abysmal comment, of course. Please, check your facts and have some brain examination for a possible Hydrocephalus affliction)

    You see, it's like a game, for us. The Brittish know that we like to argument for the sake of argument... And the other's utter humiliation. Not so dissimilar from Tauromachy. We, the french, take some fact, and go against the official trend saying something we know is true. (Note the we know is true part. It's important). And somehow, there is always some braindead macho man coming up with his "My own is longer than your's" challenge to defy us on our own grounds. And then, of course, the braindead monkey ridiculizes himself. Of course, even after admitting some semantic miscalculation, the victim can't still accept being in the bad end of an international joke, apparently everyone knowing it even before the beginning of the invasion.

    And then, after all the efforts we put together, using our intelligence services, working night and day, trying not to spill the joke and contain our laughter, sending our most talented orators, having half the world agreeing with our viewpoint when you painfully put together your supporters, the only biting, acid, venomous answer you have is "Hey, I was told they eat frogs, Muah ah ah!" ???

    WTF???

    -- Yours truly, France, (very, very, very disappointed)

  44. Re:And here I though... by Jarn_Firebrand · · Score: 0

    ROFL. Wow, until you actually have any idea what I believe, you shouldn't open your mouth. I have absolutely nothing against France, it was an attempt at humor. I found it pathetic when our government renamed French Fries to "Freedom Fries", it struck me as a childish tantrum. I believed from the very beginning that the French were right about Iraq. So please, until you know what you're talking about, don't open your mouth. And you (by you I mean the French) are obviously not immune to contempt or you would not have posted such a lengthy reply to what you wrongly viewed as contempt. In actuality, the only thing I hold contempt for is you (and this time I mean you, not the French) for being such a brain-dead idiot you can't tell a joke from... not a joke.

    I respect the French. I hope you're not an average example of the French because then I may just lose my respect for them. Go sodomize yourself with the Eiffel tower.

  45. interesting by master5o1 · · Score: 1

    This is great for Ubuntu! But, for atleast my brother and I, we use ubuntu, and find that it isn't easy to save on bandwidth when upgrading: Ie, both computers 'have' to download their own package files and install them. I'm sure you can save bandwidth somehow by looking at what is being upgraded, and if it is common between the two systems then downloading the latest version and sharing it between the two over our localhosts, but then again, that's hdd space which is limited over a few cents worth of bandwidth :P

    --
    signature is pants
    1. Re:interesting by roemcke · · Score: 1

      Ubuntu downloads packages using http, so just set up a proxy

  46. Well, there goes the neighborhood... by Plekto · · Score: 1

    Now Unbuntu has become un-cool.

  47. Looks like finally it will be Kubuntu by mambru · · Score: 1

    news here and here.