Slashdot Mirror
Texas Senate Proposes a Budget With a No-Vista-Upgrades Rider
CWmike writes "The Texas state Senate yesterday gave preliminary approval to a state budget that includes a provision forbidding government agencies from upgrading to Windows Vista without written consent of the legislature. Sen. Juan Hinojosa, vice chairman of the Finance Committee, proposed the rider because 'of the many reports of problems with Vista ... We are not in any way, shape or form trying to pick on Microsoft, but the problems with this particular [operating] system are known nationwide,' Hinojosa said during a Senate session debating the rider (starting at 4:42 of this RealMedia video stream). 'And the XP operating system is working very well.' A Microsoft spokeswoman said in response, 'We're surprised that the Texas Senate Finance Committee adopted a rider which, in effect, singles out a specific corporation and product for unequal treatment. We hope as the budget continues to go through the process, this language will be removed.'"
I'm sure Microsoft can pay to have that done.
But are you sure that in Texas such decisions are made by competant IT professionals? I wouldn't be surprised if: (a) decisions about software purchases are made separately for different parts of the state government; (b) in at least some of them people who aren't all that savvy make the decisions. It is also possible that even the IT pros are heavily invested in Microsoft and do pretty much what Microsoft says to do. So this may not be an instance of ridiculous micromanagement.
It's not a micromanagement choice when he's responsible for a government that has perhaps 50,000 workstations, each needing a $200-300 license. Conservatively. I have no idea how many workstations the entire state educational system has, but I'd bet 50,000 is a lowball estimate. But still, that's $10 million, minimum, for an upgrade. For an educational agency's budget, that's not small potatoes. That could pay for the salaries of 57 primary school teachers for the next 5 years. The fact that the upgrade has questionable value for the educational agencies in the state is a supporting point! Why spend that much money for something with no real return on investment? Or, we could just ignore the huge economic question here and cry "evil microsoft!" or "how dare they single out a single company!" Yes... Those arguments make so much more sense than it's uneconomical.
#fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
Plus, there's a potentially harmful network effect. A particular department might need new pcs, and upgrade to Vista with no particular cost or problem... but then, they're on a network with, swapping documents with, and have different support and training requirements than other XP users. All of a sudden, other XP users might feel a need to upgrade, generating unnecessary expense.
Even more importantly, do not EVER let anybody in your company or government upgrade to a newer version of Office, because the moment that lid is opened, there's no going back.
There is no IT dept for the entire State of Texas. So, first of all, your analogy is flawed.
Secondly, the legislature writes the budget for the state's OS upgrades. It is certainly within their purview to forbid an especially worthless OS on a cost/benefit basis, regardless of technical considerations.
"I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
Yeah well, legislatures don't know anything about highway construction or job creation or stem cell research but they still seem to be able to 'represent' the people that elected them and vote for things by and large that numbers of people support and would like to see addressed by the legislature. They don't have to be 'IT' people to pass a law. Hasn't stopped them before, that argument won't stop them anytime in the future.
Enjoy your Karma, after all you earned it. Feel your Karma Joe, feel it burn.
till Steve Breathing Apparatus Ballmer strides in black cape, and booming voice:
"I am altering the deal...pray I do not alter it further..."
There, fixed that for ya.
!#@%*)anks for hanging up the phone, dear.
Yes, because only Republicans can be bribed.
Just turn a blind eye to the neo-libs that defened Fannie Mae and AIG until the companies were sufficently drained not to pay them anymore.