Slashdot Mirror
Quebec Govt Sued For Ignoring Free Software
Mathieu Lutfy writes "The CBC is reporting that 'Quebec's open-source software association is suing the provincial government, saying it is giving preferential treatment to Microsoft Corp. by buying the company's products rather than using free alternatives. ... Government buyers are using an exception in provincial law that allows them to buy directly from a proprietary vendor when there are no options available, but Facil said that loophole is being abused and goes against other legal requirements to buy locally.' The group also has a press release in English."
I completely agree - our school has a phenomenal amount of money spent on Microsoft and other proprietary licenses (300+ Windows machines with office and photoshop elements, 5-10 windows servers (eugh), and the monstrosity that is SharePoint to "manage" everything... I haven't seen the bill, but it must cost a fortune. Sure, I can understand needing Windows for now - there are _some_ classes that use software other than web and word processing. But spending money on Office when OO.o does absolutely everything we use it for? Inexcusable.
Actually, it's really just a way for them to legally cook their books. While they never provide support* on any of their consumer products, they're still allowed to have a ton of unearned revenue since they only recognize 1/12th of the purchase price each month, or however long you're supported for. Assuming it's one year and a copy of Windows is $300 (I was at Staples today, and apparently it is at least for some version of XP), that means that after a month, they've got $25 of earned revenue and $275 of unearned revenue on the books. Basically, it fucks with the numbers and makes them look richer than they really are.
Of course this isn't at all specific to Microsoft - most companies that provide some sort of support contract do the same (Best Buy extended warranties? Oh yeah). I'd suggest they abuse it a bit more than most, but what do you expect?
*you know what I mean here - I'm sure there's the odd instance of it happening, but by and large the only time you get them on the phone is for an activation problem.
How are sites slashdotted when nobody reads TFAs?
But you can have a single copy of OO.o installed on a file server from which all the clients run the software (ro). In that case, you only need to update the software in one place.
Naturally, preferences and documents are saved on the client.
Put identity in the browser.
could create thousands of jobs
I'm a little fuzzy on the details from TFA but... what exactly would these jobs entail? I mean, if some govt. office is running MS Office now and have 100 employees, switching to OpenOffice would create 100 openings more? Or what?
Sounds to me like an emotional argument rather than something based on fact.
The twitter monologues. Click on my homepage and be amazed.
Right now money is being spent on licenses. This money goes out of the province (indeed out of the country) to a company that sells the software. The money is then either reinvested into building the next upgrade, a new products, used for corporate overhead or designated as "profit".
The TFA notes that the amount of money spent on software in the 6 months from February to June was 25 million dollars.
If free software could be used to replace the proprietary software, then the money could be:
1) used for other government programs
2) used for training
3) used for local support
4) used for enhancing the software for new features
5) used for lining the wallets of local entrepreneurs.
But in these cases the money stays local. Since the government almost always spends all the money that it has, in all cases except for #5 the result is that the money ends up as salaries for other employees. And since this is money over and above money that they are already spending on salaries, it means new jobs.
If we work out the numbers, let's say we give the greedy entrepreneurs a million dollars. Then let's say that the other uses result in something close to 20% for equipment and capital costs.
This leaves about 20 million dollars. At a loaded
labour rate of 100,000 dollars a years (which is generous given that we've already taken out 4 million for equipment and capital costs), this gives us 200 new jobs.
So you are right, "thousands" of new jobs is probably not realistic. But if they can really reduce the outgo of software licensing money to foreign companies, it is not an exaggeration to say that hundreds of jobs would be the result.
Finally, there's the fundamental assumption at the general level here which is fully out of place. Trade promotes efficiency and specialization in an ideal environment.
You were doing so well until your tangent. Here's the real final flaw in his argument:
Using your own natural resources when it's much cheaper to buy similar quality commodities from elsewhere is dumb. With software, there's no such inherent geographical bias. I'm unaware of any fundamental reason why a programmer in Quebec is less intelligent or capable than a programmer in Redmond, so I see no reason for Quebec to export their money to Redmond to get an item they could otherwise get locally.
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?