Slashdot Mirror


City of Munich Struggling With Basic Linux Functionality

jones_supa writes: Just like the city planned a year ago, Munich is still calling for a switch back to Windows from LiMux, their Ubuntu derivative. The councilors from Munich's conservative CSU party have called the operating system installed on their laptops "cumbersome to use" and "of very limited use." The letter from the two senior members of the city's IT committee (PDF in German) asks the mayor to consider removing the Linux-based OS and to install Windows and Office. "There are no programs for text editing, Skype, Office etc. installed and that prevents normal use," the letter argues. Another complaint from councilors is that "the lack of user permissions makes them of limited use." These kind of arguments raise eyebrows, as all that functionality is certainly found on Linux.

7 of 394 comments (clear)

  1. There is some Background ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Going to Linux was a big politcal thing (pushed by a social democratic administration) in Munich, being thoroughly planned project for over 10 years. Goal: reduce license costs, increase independence. Losing Munich to a self hosting project did cost Microsoft a lot, including prestige. They are very committed to see it fail.
    Now, they recently moved their German HQ from rural Munich into the center (read: into central Munichs tax borders). And they have unleashed all lobbying power they could get hold on.
    These two Politicians from the letter are from the CSU, that is Bavarias quasi-monarchistic conservative big-industry corruption-laden redneck shithead party, that is in lead of whole Bavaria - except Munich, which means, they are in opposition.
    Now, review that case again ...

  2. Re:Tell the old dogs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    You're absolutely correct. Linux is like the british sports car of OS's. It is fun to pop the hood and make a few tweaks, drive it around the switchbacks on a sunny weekend afternoon, but you're not going to be loading any hay bails into the boot of that austin healey.

  3. Re:wtf? by ve3oat · · Score: 3, Interesting

    For some reason, "etc" appears as "etc', rather than "usw".

  4. Re:Tell the old dogs by rcoxdav · · Score: 3, Interesting

    That may be true, but how well would she be able to use it without someone like you to smooth out the rough edges?

  5. Re: Idiocy. by Aighearach · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Right, because if the company is an exception (makes electronics, is an engineering firm, has a real engineering department, etc) then the employee who needs that access isn't an exception, and those tools are already allowed.

    There seems to be a lot of handwaving asserting that "IT" is exclusively synonymous with BOFH, but it just isn't so. The BOFH is the exception, and most companies have people with rather complete knowledge of the business' practices creating the list of what software is needed.

    And anything actually needed that is mistakenly excluded will quickly get approved, because a project manager is allowed to talk directly to an IT manager. The reason that it requires "good luck" to "claim you're an exception" is that in this scenario, you're asking for something your own supervisor already looked at and reminded you that you don't need it, and you're trying to get special approval. Or, you asked your supervisor and they decided to smack you with the general policy and deny that they could get an approval in order to passive-aggressively get you to stop asking for things.

    My experience as an admin tells me, workers outside of software development needs a special thing installed. Developers have unrestricted workstations, but will require constant admin attention to set up servers, and having dev-ops specialists will really improve this. Generally, even trained developers will not ask for the combination of technologies that meets the existing security requirements; they will ask for whatever the default (or personal preference) setup is, instead of the slightly harder way of doing things that is more secure.

    Outside of developers, if the project managers aren't asking for it to be approved for the whole team, then it isn't needed by any of them and somebody just wants to Be Exceptional. And if they're asking for controls to be removed, they should probably be audited to see if they're actually working at work, or gambling/watching pr0n.

  6. Re:Idiocy. by Harlequin80 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    My office is completely based on Linux and all the people working there use their machines for basic word processing and internet type activities. When someone new starts they get a little shocked by the login screen not being windows, and after asking where the internet button is and being shown the firefox button they are pretty much away.

    None of them have any idea what is happening under the hood and they simply don't care. After a few weeks someone will show them virtual desktops and it will be a whole round of amazement. I've even given linux to my mother in law and she has been happy (as much as it is physically possible for her to be happy of course :P)

  7. Re:Idiocy. by Zupaplex · · Score: 3, Interesting

    You seem to have misread GP's "or" as "xor".