Slashdot Mirror
The State of Munich's Ongoing Linux Migration
christian.einfeldt writes "The Munich decision to move its 14,000 desktops to Free Open Source Software created a big splash back in 2003 as news circulated of the third-largest German city's defection from Microsoft. When it was announced in 2003, the story garnered coverage even in the US, such as an extensive article in USA Today on-line. Currently, about 60% of desktops are using OpenOffice, with the remaining 40% to be completed by the end of 2009. Firefox and Thunderbird are being used in all of the city's desktop machines. Ten percent of desktops are running the LiMux Debian-based distro, and 80% will be running LiMux by 2012 at the latest. Autonomy was generally considered more important than cost savings, although the LiMux initiative is increasing competition in the IT industry in Munich already. The program has succeeded because the city administration has been careful to reach out to all stakeholders, from managers down to simple end users."
Here's the blog from Floria Schiessl, project leader of the LiMux distro and the Munich migration: http://www.floschi.info/
Here's a blog from someone who believes the Munich migration was a failure: http://limuxwatch.blogspot.com/
From reading both, I tend to gravitate towards the failure side. It's 2009 and only 10% migration? Wasn't this suppose to save money? It's a frigging embarrassment! How are you suppose to point to Munich as an example of free and open-source software working on a city scale when they can't even implement it in a reasonable time-frame?
Waaaah! Asus Slapped Linux in THE FACE! Sob! Somebody call the Waahmbulance!
Linux dreamers have faith that Linux is more than just a niche product for hobbyists and power users.
Mr. Babcock then goes on for like another 3,000 words, explaining how Microsoft, which makes over a billion dollars profit each month needs to follow the Linux model, which makes zero. Good luck with that!
Now maybe, in your opinion, that's criticism, in mine it's trolling
I posted a comment which was negative about the transition, anyway I think that after 6 years, the 10% conversion rate and no other cities following Munich's lead speaks for itself. I'd love it if somehow expressing my honest opinion involved Microsoft giving me money, unbelievably it doesn't. If Microsoft is Astro-turfing Slashdot to give it a pro-MS bias, they're doing an unbelievably shitty job.
From the blog:
According to vice director SchieÃYl, an upgrade of the then-existing Windows NT4 operating system to Windows XP would have been as much as two million euros cheaper.
Hmm I wonder how they arrived at that figure? If the blog said Windows 2000 to Windows XP then I might concede however NT4 is normally used on servers (it's a bit expensive for the desktop) I would have expected NT4 to Windows 2003. Are we talking servers here or the desktop and why XP did not Microsoft want firms to upgrade to Vista? Even if the figure they gave is true well that is Government for you and for a city like Munich then 2 million Euros is not that much for a one time cost..
The biggest obstacle to installing a Linux Distribution on the desktop is actually middle management not the rank and file worker. If your business has locked themselves into Microsoft solutions then shifting to Linux solutions is going to be hard be it server or desktop and in many ways expensive because there are many proprietary Microsoft solutions that make integration with other operating systems difficult. It must be noted that this is not the fault of other operating systems but of Microsoft, after-all it is not as if Linux solutions hide their API's and source code.
There ain't no such thing as proprietary standards only proprietary formats. Standards are by definition open.
as alot of people finding out in these tough times its hard to put food on a table if you give your work away for free
If work was being given away for free, the budget would be a tad smaller, right?
I repeat: buying Microsoft licenses is *not* going to improve economy. It only improves Microsoft profits.
Save your wrists today - switch to Dvorak
Further, you must bear in mind that Munich is a pioneer in even attempting to replace a major Microsoft based infrastructure with open source software. They are having to to do everything from scratch, which I'm sure increases the cost.
That's what you'd call an early adoptor, they usually pay more, but definitly in this case, everyone, especially the other german government agencies that will adopt it too, will benefit.
New things are always on the horizon
whats wrong with a company making a profit?
Strawman.
It's not just "a company", it's Microsoft. If you don't know why Microsoft is special, I recommend a few more years in the internets before proceeding with commenting on tech websites.
Save your wrists today - switch to Dvorak
whats wrong with a company making a profit?
Nothing, but there are different way to achieve a profit
.
In the case of Microsoft there are recognised problems with the morality of their business model.
It's the client who has (should have!) the liberty to go along with a particular business model and Munich has made it's decision not to follow the Microsoft ways.
Some claim there is no morality in business but especially when public monies are involved you better review that opinion.
"The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
Nothing. Of course MS wants to make a profit, and good luck to them. But I don't work for them, so MS profits don't benefit me.
This whole Munchen idea was NOT about how much the company's involved making money. It was about the CONSUMER paying less money.
You know - I always think it is strange that these arguments are all about how the company's are driving well, but not how the consumers (and that are you and me and the man in the street - make no mistake) are served well. I do not care a bit if Microsoft gets money or gets a lot more money. However - I DO care if it is MY money. Open Source software is cheap, so it is a big bonus for me as consumer. I do not care if Ballmer gets a lot of money - as long it's not my money. Result? If I buy some Microsoft software I shoot myself in the foot. Most consumers - and that's most of you and certainly me - are better off with Open Source software. Simple...
Try to see all this from a consumer point of view.
To whom is that blog directed? (a blog that started barely 6 months ago).
Not to the German public it seems.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Google, Red Hat and others must be shitting their pants ...
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Unless your company is a "protection" racket Mafia or something similarly ethically dubious (like abusing your monopolistic position in a market for example).
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
This is pretty tame compared to such shining Linux example blogs as Groklaw and BoycottNovell.
There's plenty of bias to go around.
If you need web hosting, you could do worse than here
Like the article says, âoethey reached out to all stakeholdersâ. I think the amazing part is that they got enough stakeholders to agree to the change. Change is not something that a lot of people âoeembraceâ if you will, especially government agencies that entrenched in their ways of doing things. I could easily imagine them taking ten years just to make a decision never mind getting the project started. I would say that to have gotten as much done as fast as they have would be considered the speed of light in a lot of situations.
Conclusions
"There are perhaps two main lessons to be drawn from Munich's experience. The first one is that such a large-scale migration requires careful analysis and planning, as well as a clearly defined goal. It bears repeating that in Munich this goal is the strategic independence from software suppliers. Lower IT costs are a welcome side-effect, but autonomy is more important."
I see no failure. I see people thinking outside the Microsoft box. People who are interested might actually read and understand. http://www.osor.eu/case_studies/declaration-of-independence-the-limux-project-in-munich#section-12
I don't believe that anyone in the Linux world has ever suggested that migrating to Linux is completely "free", or even that it saves money in the short term. It most definitely saves tons of money in the long run. To suggest otherwise amounts to FUD.
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
As much as I like to bash Microsoft, that doesn't completely answer his question. Even if there are more pro-Microsoft posters on Slashdot, does it mean that those posters are shills? Maybe their claims are justified.