Spain Prepares For 14,000-User Linux Installation

rafael_es_son writes "The regional Health Service of Extremadura, Spain (Servicio Extremeño de Salud) prepares for what IBM describes as the country's biggest GNU/Linux rollout to date. IBM is to receive $33.8 million USD over a four year period for the development of systems which should enable some 14,000 doctors and other medical professionals access to patient health care data on a region currently described as underserved in comparison with the rest of the country." (Read more below.)

"The current biggest European implementation title-holder, German National Railway, cites 'continuous cost savings, greater flexibility and integration benefits' as reason for changing over to GNU/Linux-based solutions. The German National Railway GNU/Linux implementation currently boasts approximately 55,000 users, in comparison to the current Munich implementation of 14,000 desktops.

We of course know better: Interoperability and Open Source are not synonymous."

Interoperability

[PhiznTRG]

Bill is, of course, correct that open-source and interoperability are not necessarily synonymous. That isn't to say that Microsoft's close-source, proprietary approach will lead to better interoperability.

Also, though not quantifiable, the fast development cycle that open-source is often praised for could lead to broken interoperability if the developers of an open source application do not feel like maintaining the function. The typical reply is that the code is opensource, so you can modify it and put the functions you want back in. This puts the enduser in the unenviable position of having to develop an application as opposed to using it. To be fair, if Microsoft breaks a function there typically isn't anything the enduser can do but complain.

This is both a blessing and curse of open-source software that is not maintained or supported by a large corporate identity (e.g. IBM, which is why this does not apply to Microsoft's main concern, Linux...IBM would not support IBM and allow interoperability to break.)

Re:Interoperability

[Daniel Zappala]

This is the case of a comment (from Bill Gates) that technically could be true, but in practice is not. There is a big difference between the two. Open source projects have a much better history of interoperability, particularly when the standards themselves are open. Heck, open source software even bends over backwards to interoperate with Microsoft stuff (e.g. Samba) without much help from Microsoft itself.