Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Birmingham To Buy More, Not Less Open Source

Posted by kdawson on Thu Nov 30, 2006 11:25 AM
from the on-second-look dept.
K-boy writes, "Last week, the press (and Slashdot) reported that Birmingham City Council had decided to ditch its open source project because a report said its trial had cost £100,000 more than it would have cost to buy Windows. However, Techworld has discovered that the opposite is true, and the Council is actually planning to use more open source software as well as to roll out Linux in the next few years. The head of IT was interviewed and he gives a fascinating rundown of the problems he had getting open source working with his systems. More interestingly, he points out that now the trial is over and he and his staff have the technical skills, they expect to save lots of money in future by going open source. Oh, and the report's figures were based on the special rates that Microsoft gives Councils just to make sure the short-term budget look worse — £58 for a Windows license as opposed to the normal £100."
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] Birmingham Drops Open Source Initiative 275 comments
eldavojohn writes "Birmingham, England put a stop to a half million pound project to put Linux and open source applications on library access PCs across the city. From the article, 'The council planned to roll out Linux software and applications on 1,500 desktops in libraries across the city, but in the end went no further than a 200-desktop project. Several industry watchers have voiced their concerns about the project, particularly around the number of PCs rolled out. Birmingham's expenditure averaged over 2,500 pounds per PC.' Why did they stop after 200 PCs? Because they claimed with Windows, the project would have been 100,000 pounds cheaper. One may wonder if they paid for initial training of their workforce making the first 200 more expensive than the rest but the article does not say whether or not this occurred."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • by cerberusss (660701) <slashdot&vankuik,nl> on Thursday November 30 2006, @11:34AM (#17050534) Homepage Journal

    Birmingham City Council has defended its year-long trial of desktop Linux, claiming it to be a success, despite an independent report showing it would have been cheaper to install Windows XP.

    In an exclusive interview with Techworld, head of IT for the council, Glyn Evans, argued that the higher cost resulted from the council having to experiment with the new technology and build up a depth of technical understanding, as well as fit it with the complex system already in place.

    The 105,000 saving that the report says would have resulted from going with Windows XP has also come under question as it was calculated using the special discounted licence rate that Microsoft offers councils - something critics argue is a calculated effort to prevent public bodies from building up technical knowledge of open source offerings.

    With Birmingham's trial period over and with lessons learnt and understanding gained, the Council now expects to make cost savings over time, and contrary to press reports which claimed Birmingham had scrapped the Linux initiative, it will in fact "significantly increase" its use of open-source software, Evans said. The trial also had other positive results, he claimed, such as demonstrating the ease with which Firefox and OpenOffice.org can be substituted for Internet Explorer and Microsoft Office.

    The trial was carried out with the government-backed Open Source Academy (OSA), and planned to install Linux on 330 desktops in the council's libraries service, split between staff PCs and public access terminals, in an effort to build up practical experience that could be drawn on by other public-sector bodies.

    It ran from April 2005 to March 2006, but is still ongoing, with the council refining its Linux desktop image and planning further rollouts next year, according to Evans. "The project did not end when the element of original funding ended, because it is part of the Library Service strategy," he told Techworld. "This project is still very much ongoing, and now that a stable image... has been developed, we would expect significant movement forward."

    Over-ambitious

    He admitted the council's original plans were over-ambitious, with rollouts of Linux-based staff and public PCs originally scheduled during the one-year trial period. In reality, ongoing testing of the desktop configuration means no Linux desktops have yet been installed. Instead, 96 public desktops and 134 staff desktops are running open source applications such as the OpenOffice.org office suite and the Firefox browser.

    The council does plan to begin migrating those desktops to its Suse Professional 9.3-based desktop OS, however, a plan that should go into action in the near future, according to Evans. He said that far from scrapping the Linux initiative, as has occurred in some other high-profile cases such as the London borough of Newham, Birmingham is planning to "significantly increase" the number of desktops involved with the project.

    Evans' description of the project is a sharp contrast to the findings described in a case study authored by iMpower Consulting at the formal conclusion of the trial in March, which is available from the OSA's website [pdf [opensourceacademy.org.uk]]. The case study found that the council had failed to make a business case for its Linux desktops, largely because the half-a-million-pound cost of designing and implementing the system cost more than the estimated cost for a Windows XP installation.

    The difference is largely down to high "team costs", including setting up the project, technical definition and design, development and testing and training, all of which amounted to roughly 100,000 more than the estimated team costs for a Windows installation. The total cost of the trial was 534,710, compared to an estimated 429,960 for Windows XP.

    "The project showed that there are considerable costs incurred in de

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      "Glyn Evans, argued that the higher cost resulted from the council having to experiment with the new technology and build up a depth of technical understanding, as well as fit it with the complex system already in place."

      As would anyone contemplating a move to new systems and new technologies.

      From my perspective it appears that both sides have a point. Free software has costs associated with it, just like "paid" commercial software. Those costs can be purchase price, future upgrade costs, support fees, trai
    • I couldn't help laughing out loud at the concept of TCO (Total Cost of Ownership) being soundly slapped over the rump. The reason that "Neutral And Independent / May Bill Gates Live Forever" studies show Linux having a higher TCO is because of the up-front retraining investment needed. Microsoft portrays it as a steep, unworthwhile climb. But simply by doing the trial, Birmingham went over the hump already, and is already on the downhill slope where they can sit back and recoup their costs for years to c
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        As a librarian who manage several public access terminals, we also use similiar software to reboot the system back to a know good state.

        1) Safety: so people can download various trojans, spyware or virus, without hurting other users who use the same terminal down the line.

        2) Copyright: People download all sort of copyrighted materials on public terminals. If we allow those to stay on our harddrives, the liability issue is a concern. With those software, it just flush everything out, so it's all good whe
        • by indifferent children (842621) on Thursday November 30 2006, @02:19PM (#17053554)
          I suppose each session would be a new user with their own /usr/random directory . Once they are done, the user got deletedd.

          No, always use the same user account, such as "publicusr". At the end of a session, just run "rm -Rf /home/publicusr/*". That will leave the publicusr home directory intact, but remove all of its contents, including any downloaded material (copyrighted material, malware, etc.) and clear the browser settings and browser history.

          If you want to have certain settings exist in the user directory, copy them in from a pre-defined directory, after running the delete.

          Don't force a capable athlete to ride in an expensive wheelchair, just because all of your professional experience comes from working with cripples.

  • by russ1337 (938915) on Thursday November 30 2006, @11:37AM (#17050574)
    This reminds me of the "You can teach a man to fish" saying...

    In this case the fishing classes cost some money, sure. And the report basically said the would have saved money by purchasing some fish... well duh. - but how long would that fish have lasted?

    They now know how to get unlimited fish themselves and are free from the stinking fish market.

    • by dasunt (249686) on Thursday November 30 2006, @11:56AM (#17050932)

      I think we need a new saying:

      "Threaten to learn how to fish, and get a discount from the fishmonger!"

      Since MS seems to give discounts to anyone who looks at OSS, if I was the head of a large city's IT department, I'd put a cheap student intern on the job of writing up a migration plan and publicize the plan loudly. It may be impossible to get everyone to move to OSS (especially with local politics and entrenched technologies), but Microsoft seems to be willing to give discounts on the next round of pricing. ;)

    • This reminds me of the "You can teach a man to fish" saying...

      You mean:

      Give a man a fish and he eats for a day
      Teach a man to fish and he gets rammed by a US submarine [pbs.org]?

      • by pavera (320634) on Thursday November 30 2006, @11:54AM (#17050910) Journal
        True, but in the public sector, and in IT in general you aren't in a "production" environment. There isn't something else you are doing that is bringing in revenue. IT is budgeted all over the world in all kinds of companies as OVERHEAD. So, spending a little more overhead up front to reduce overhead over the long haul and get off the upgrade treadmill is almost always the right thing to do.

        Now if you are a programmer, and your desktop linux is somehow reducing your ability to write code (IE you spend an hour each day dealing with software updates or something) then windows is a better fit... Although I'm much more productive coding under linux than windows....

      • I don't think the fish analogy maps very well. Migrating to FOSS isn't necessarily like teaching someone to fish (teaching himher how to program). It's more like taking someone who has only ever seen fish in the supermarket, and showing them a harbor. Explain where fish come from, the fact that they reproduce on their own, etc. At this point the person doesn't have to learn to fish. She could just buy from one of the many beachfront markets. She could hire one of the many fishing companies or individuals i
  • by Doc Ruby (173196) on Thursday November 30 2006, @11:38AM (#17050586) Homepage Journal
    City Councils are making pioneering tech policy decisions these days on open source, WiFi, broadband, and other tech procurement. But they're totally outclassed by marketing strategies that distort the facts on which decisions are made.

    With all of the rigged numbers originating in incumbent market dominators showing up in city council policy and budget analyses, it's obvious the councils need guidance. I know that the NYC City Council doesn't have any resources with "BS logs" of ongoing vendor distortions, except for consultants like me. State/federal or even international organizations that serve the people administered by these city councils should produce research to weed out the lies. Sort of like a "City Council Consumer Reports". In the US, the GAO (now "Government Accountability Office"), or the Office of Management and Budget, or some team at Treasury at the federal level, could produce them. Or the state Comptroller. Or maybe a "City Councils Association", that could reach internationally.

    Government is really big. In the US it's about 25% of our economy, though that includes the military (about 30% of total). So maybe these guidelines are already being produced, perhaps redundantly. The government response would be to produce similarly obscure guidelines on finding the guidelines. That's how government gets so big (especially the military). Is there a better way for City Councils to share wisdom, not just knowledge, about the information used to make these decisions?
    • Or, it becomes a whole new line of revenue for municipal councils: IT consulting to larger branches of government.
  • by njdj (458173) on Thursday November 30 2006, @11:45AM (#17050728)

    At one point, realising that most of the usability issues were attributable to Gnome, which had taken three months to configure, staff ripped out Gnome and replaced it with KDE.

    I use Gnome, but it sure has usability issues. I hope the Gnome developers will take the trouble to understand why Birmingham dumped Gnome - sfter selecting it initially.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      They are smart, I think I spent 6 months before abandoning Gnome for KDE. The last straw was when they broke the menu system.
        • by hab136 (30884) on Thursday November 30 2006, @02:06PM (#17053268) Journal
          OSX does it exactly the same way...I think Apple probably did some usability studies at some point...
          If you're talking about Yes/No dialog boxes - no, they do it differently.

          Instead of "Do you want to save the changes? Yes / No / Cancel" you get "You have unsaved changes. Save / Don't Save / Cancel". All of your choices are verbs. This avoids monstrosities like "Click Yes to do xxxx, click No to yyyyy", which I've seen in numerous Windows programs (Microsoft Access comes to mind).

          From: http://developer.apple.com/documentation/UserExper ience/Conceptual/OSXHIGuidelines/XHIGControls/chap ter_18_section_2.html [apple.com]
          "Button names should be verbs that describe the action performed--Save, Close, Print, Delete, and so on. If a button acts on a single setting, label the button as specifically as possible; "Choose Picture...," for example, is more helpful than "Choose..." Because most buttons initiate an immediate action, it shouldn't be necessary to use "now" (Scan Now, for example) in the label. Don't use push buttons to indicate a state such as On or Off (where it would be more appropriate to use checkboxes).

  • This can't be good (Score:3, Interesting)

    by smooth wombat (796938) on Thursday November 30 2006, @11:45AM (#17050730) Homepage Journal
    At one point, realising that most of the usability issues were attributable to Gnome, which had taken three months to configure, staff ripped out Gnome and replaced it with KDE. The new interface was up and running within a week.


    I don't (yet) run Linux but have fiddled with a Slack 10 and Debian installation but the above comment can't be good for the folks developing Gnome.

    Can someone with a bit more insight explain why one would work better in the above scenario since, presumbably, both do the same thing?

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      They do the same thing (provide a GUI desktop interface) but in very different ways. Apparently the way KDE does things worked better for them then the GNOME way. It's the same reason why people will prefer one over the other.
    • by BigBuckHunter (722855) on Thursday November 30 2006, @12:32PM (#17051492)
      Can someone with a bit more insight explain why one would work better in the above scenario since, presumably, both do the same thing?

      To Grossly over simplify, Gnome sacrifices customizability for usability and simplicity. KDE sacrifices simplicity for customizability In environments that demand a certain configuration which doesn't match Gnome's ideal usage case, KDE is often a better fit.

      They're both great desktop managers, and each has strengths in certain areas. And yes, I know "customizability" isn't a real word.

      BBH
  • The council does plan to begin migrating those desktops to its Suse Professional 9.3-based desktop OS,


    What's the logic of going with a version that is so far behind? I know that you don't go bleeding edge with such a project but 9.3 is ancient. I guess it is still supported but it seems like being *that* far behind would be leaving yourself open to a number of security/compatibility issues.
    • Stability, and fewer bugs. In my business, I don't buy any software that is newer than a year or two old. 9.3 is only a year and a half old. That's certainly not ancient. If patches aren't being released for a product that's only a year and a half old, then I'd say that's a very serious problem (and I wouldn't buy it). You gotta remember, that they're not in the business of installing software. Like most businesses and other organizations, the software is supposed to be installed, and forgotten. If i
  • Under question? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by aardvarkjoe (156801) on Thursday November 30 2006, @11:48AM (#17050786)
    The £105,000 saving that the report says would have resulted from going with Windows XP has also come under question as it was calculated using the special discounted licence rate that Microsoft offers councils - something critics argue is a calculated effort to prevent public bodies from building up technical knowledge of open source offerings.

    How could the savings be "under question" because of the discounted rate? What, do you expect them to calculate the savings while pretending that they would have had to pay full price? If so, Microsoft would have rightly stated that they were massaging the numbers just to make open source look good.

    What's more interesting is whether their numbers for open source included the costs of Windows XP, as they didn't actually install any Linux systems. (Not exactly a big win for Linux there, either.) How do you spend £534,710 on installing OpenOffice and Firefox on 230 Windows computers, and playing around with Suse for a year, anyway?

    • How do you spend £534,710 on installing OpenOffice and Firefox on 230 Windows computers, and playing around with Suse for a year, anyway?

      My impression is that they've been messing around with trials of different replacement technologies, agree that Firefox and Open Office are clear wins and are still trying to decide on spots where Linux would make sense. The money is probably mostly salaries of people putting in full- or part-time work on it.

      But, yeah -- that "based on the special rates" bit is brai

  • oh dear.... (Score:3, Funny)

    by advocate_one (662832) on Thursday November 30 2006, @11:49AM (#17050814)
    usability problems with the original Gnome interface. At one point, realising that most of the usability issues were attributable to Gnome, which had taken three months to configure, staff ripped out Gnome and replaced it with KDE. The new interface was up and running within a week.

    start the Gnome vs. KDE bun fight... 3, 2, 1...

  • Great news (Score:2, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Somewhere near where the M6 joins the M5 .....
    Thees is bostin' nyohs! Oi main, an' all, oos Brummies 've bin pronaincing it as Leenux, and not Loinux, seence forever, loike. Way don' naid no steenkin' Moicrosoft!

    Anywy, are yo mashin?
  • by bogaboga (793279) on Thursday November 30 2006, @12:02PM (#17051030)
    From the article...

    "At one point, realising that most of the usability issues were attributable to Gnome, which had taken three months to configure, staff ripped out Gnome and replaced it with KDE. The new interface was up and running within a week....

    I have long said that Gnome had a problem for most users in a typical business environment, and was met with comments referring to me as a troll and as one who was just a KDE fanboy.

    This article articulates just one of the problems with Gnome.

    For this particular problem, there are folks who say that I should use "ctrl + L". Though this keyboard shortcut is not even documented anywhere near where one would want to use it. Imagine that.

    • I want to be able to type in Gnome's file selector dialog. Gnome will not permit me!

    • Why should Gnome assume that every file I want to open *is* on the local system? KDE on the other hand, does not assume that. And you can type/paste whatever URL you want and it will do the needful.
    • Why can't I be able to do some basic file operations (renaming, deleting, moving) in the selector dialog itself? Why do I have to go back and open Nautilus?

    These are just *some* of the issues that make Gnome a non-starter for me and I am glad the Britons found out as well. This will make the developers think about what users want. How can a desktop environment take three months to configure? This is insane! These are not my words but quotes from the article.

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          "DVD playback just works in Windows" You misspelled "not available by default in Windows so your DVD drive cannot play DVD's until you install a third-party application".
  • Calculating ROI is difficult in technology projects, because there's a factor which is difficult to measure. I'd call it Opportunity Cost, but perhaps there is another name.

    That is, several questions come to mind:

    - What's the cost for not being able to do something? That is, if there end solution doesn't support a given task, what's the cost? Perhaps they don't even know they could perform this task right now.
    - Imagine instead of spending time on this project, you did something else with your resources.
  • by rs232 (849320) on Thursday November 30 2006, @12:13PM (#17051184)
    "no Linux desktops have yet been installed"

    It strikes me that thay attempted a roll out of a Linux desktop solution with no previous experience. They would have been occupied in bringing in an experienced company to do the job.

    "half-a-million-pound cost of designing and implementing the system cost more than the estimated cost for a Windows XP installation"

    What were they implimenting on the Suse desktop that required spending half a million pounds.

    "usability problems with the original Gnome interface .. staff ripped out Gnome and replaced it with KDE"

    Like what, Gnome is specifically designed to provide a rich user interface. Either of them can be replaced by a Windows look alike.

    "For instance, existing Windows 3.1 public terminals used a program called Deepfreeze that rebooted the system at the end of each session, something that had to be re-engineered for Linux"

    He's kidding, put a line in .bash_logout [nrc-cnrc.gc.ca] 'shutdown -r 0 now' and that's it. And besides which, why do you need to reboot at logout.

    "Staff also found that the OS was storing information about the contents of public users' removable media, and for privacy purposes had to develop a script to delete this information"

    Like where and how, Linux mostly uses /tmp to store temp files all you have to do is add another line to .bash_logout 'find /tmp/ -user $user -exec rm -r {} \;'. Or else put /tmp in a ramdisk and flush it to logout.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      "For instance, existing Windows 3.1 public terminals used a program called Deepfreeze that rebooted the system at the end of each session, something that had to be re-engineered for Linux"
      "Staff also found that the OS was storing information about the contents of public users' removable media, and for privacy purposes had to develop a script to delete this information"

      Or just don't fit public terminals with HDDs -- boot them from CD, or read-only Flash drive, with all writable directories in RAMdisk.

      You

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        Interesting???? You mean "stupid," don't you?

        In this day of virtual, all of this could be done with starting a new virtual machine for each user. Once the user is gone, so it the virtual machine. Yes, it would take longer to boot than windows 3.1, but you could have a second virtual waiting in the wings for when the logout happens, then start another one up to be waiting for when the current one is logged out.

        There's always more than one way to skin a cat. If you like to have the cat screaming and scra

  • Short term budget (Score:3, Insightful)

    by hey! (33014) on Thursday November 30 2006, @12:24PM (#17051362) Homepage Journal
    It's unfair on several levels to imply that using short term figures is dishonest. The short term budget is the only budget you can point to with any certainty.

    Some people think Microsoft produces nothing but crap, and other people think Microsoft produces the nothing but the finest. Both views miss the point of Microsoft. Microsoft is about consistently delivering mediocrity, year in, year out.

    This sounds like damning with faint praise, but consistent mediocrity has its advantages. Think of all the once great products that were run into the ground; or the promising projects that ended up going nowhere. Microsoft might be mean old Mr. Potter, but too often the alternative is like the Bailey Building and Loan without George Bailey. Do you really want Uncle Billy managing your nest egg?

    Birmingham chose SUSE; how much trust should you put in Novell's future stewardship of SUSE, even granting the best of intentions?

    It's important to acknowledge the leap of faith that Birmingham is making here. Pretending that short term costs don't matter underestimates the guts it takes to do that. Somebody has to take a leap of faith, every now and then, but it doesn't always end happily.
    • Re:*BUY* more? (Score:5, Informative)

      by 'nother poster (700681) on Thursday November 30 2006, @11:35AM (#17050552)
      You need support. You need techs and installers and troubleshooters on staff. You need a support contract so that if anything bites it big time you can call up Novell, or Redhat, and have them find the solution for you rather than tying up your staff that already have other duties. Besides, if it becomes unresolvable you can point to the purchased support as the cause thus covering your very tender and precious butt. Same thing goes on with any software in a commercial/governmental setting.
      • >>> "You need support. You need techs and installers and troubleshooters on staff. "

        You need some level of support agreement with either solution - Windows or Linux. Comparing the costs of a MSFT support agent or a Red-hat/Novell/Ubuntu support agent is another choice (and cost driver) altogether. As is training and converting users.

        My guess is it is a similar cost of support with either solution. I also expect the USER training required to migrate to Vista is similar cost to migrating to L
        • Part of the reason for the difference is also that Microsoft has a virtual monopoly on support contracts for their own software. Sure, there's lots of help out there, but generally if politicians buy M$ software they assume they're going to get some M$ support. This is directly opposite in standing from Linux; there's so much in common between the various distros that basic support can be cross trained. Resultingly, there is a much more competitive market, and the support acquired per dollar is probably
        • Re:*BUY* more? (Score:4, Informative)

          by ajs318 (655362) <sd_resp2@earthshod. c o .uk> on Thursday November 30 2006, @12:20PM (#17051314)
          Windows is prone to going Tango Uniform for no good reason, and nine times out of ten Windows cab ne fixed simply by rebooting. And you can train a monkey to reboot a Windows machine -- in fact, it wouldn't surprise me one bit if somebody somewhere has actually done this. This means Windows "techies" are cheap, because nine times out of ten they'll just reboot the errant machine (which the user could have done for themself, were they not scared absolutely shitless by the complexity of anything that plugs in and has more than three buttons on it) and it will work -- and the tenth time they'll reboot it a few times, mutter a few sotto voce expletives, realise it's not having it, give up and buy a new one. This means you end up scrapping repairable machines -- but of course, they ultimately come out of departments' own budgets, not IT's budget.

          Unix-like systems don't usually fail without good reason. So anybody working on them really needs to know their arse from a hole in the ground. This means Unix techies are expensive -- because they're good. They have no choice but to be. And there's more transferrability of skills between software: much of what you might learn about Linux can be applied to Solaris and the BSDs, some of what you might learn about MySQL can be applied to PostgreSQL or Firebird, Perl is a bit like PHP, ProFTPD and Apache have similar configuration file syntaxes, and so forth.

          Basically, if you pay peanuts, you get monkeys.
    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      You're sig answers your question, plus you forgot to say "First Post!"
    • it is that you are Free to make changes to the code. For a single person, it may be cheaper to go with Windows. But for any company with an IT dept. it will nearly always be cheaper and better to go with OSS. The one place where Windows wins out is for specialized apps that run only on windows, which only encourages competition in an OSS version that will run on Linux and apple.
      • Making changes to the code is all nice and dandy, but realistically, how many people actually have that expertise that'd enable them to make such changes?
        • Re:NO! (Score:4, Insightful)

          by Mateo_LeFou (859634) on Thursday November 30 2006, @11:50AM (#17050834) Homepage
          Doesn't matter how many have the expertise. With proprietary software the possibility outright *does *not *exist and with FOSS it does.

          Other possibilities are:
          -acquire the expertise
          -hire someone who has it

          Are you trying to paint possibilities as a drawback?
          • Only when the number of possibilities is significantly large compared to an existing working solution by another vendor.
              • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

                If "word" for $39 as part of home office meets 99% of my needs and openoffice meets my needs but could in theory be enhanced to meet 100% of my needs- I'll probably go with word despite disliking paying $39 and microsoft in general.

                I groan everytime i see a pro-linux person complain "all you have to do is recompile the device drivers!"

                They just don't get it.
                • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

                  I don't have a problem with your decision to be locked-in if you want. The problem comes later, when you decide you don't want to be locked in anymore, so you try out OOo and complain that it's "broken" 'cause it can't display your .doc files the way Word did.

                  The problem is not that $39 is really unreasonable. The problem is that the lock-in makes it so that more and more can be added to that $39 as time rolls on.
        • we're not talking about individuals here, we're talking about a city council. they should be able to offer bounties/find someone to carry out the required changes. after all, they managed it to get specialist software developed for windows.
          one of the problems with adoption of foss is in my opinion that people don't know how the whole mentality works. i sometimes wonder if the average worker goes into his local computer shop, doesn't find any software on shelves for linux and therefore concludes that there
      • it is that you are Free to make changes to the code

        A fact which is completely irrelvant to about 98% of the population.

        For a single person, it may be cheaper to go with Windows. But for any company with an IT dept. it will nearly always be cheaper and better to go with OSS. The one place where Windows wins out is for specialized apps that run only on windows

        You have this totally backwards. Who exactly do you think it is that has specialized apps? Companies do. If they have to be rewritten, thats gre

    • The point of FOSS is that it works better and can be customized if it still doesn't work well enough. EOF.
    • > Isn't the point of OSS that its FREE?

      Sure, if you are living in a cave.

      In truth (and in reality), no piece of software is ever truly *free* -- you invest it in other forms. The things that you invest in with may not be very valuable to you, but they are investments neverthless (e.g. time).

      Now, this is true for everything, and softwware, free or otherwise, is no exception.

      TCO, maintenance, support and other things are not free, even if a piece of software is free. In some ways, *paying* for something wo
      • Depends on your definition of "free". Here are some that I made up earlier:
        • Free as in beer: Technically, Linux and a good 90% of everything a user may need for data center operations or enterprise activities can be downloaded for no cost beyond the cost of the bandwidth to obtain it, the cost of the physical storage used to hold it and the cost of the time to install and configure it. So if you define "net cost" as the cost to install after you subtract all the things you'd need to spend money on whatever y
      • that's the phrase, but most open source users/advocates seem to think "free as in beer" is something other than "not paying money", and "free as in freedom" contains "not paying money", as well as some obscure subset of the standard definition of "freedom"