Linux in Munich Followup 271
Rican writes "Wired has a story that details some of the difficulties that Project LiMux seems to be experiencing in Munich. Including financial and technical issues. On the positive side it looks like despite these setbacks they are continuing with the project and have a positive attitude about its completion. Let's keep our fingers crossed and do what we can to support this monumental effort that will benefit the whole Open Source Community."
If there is one placeq (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:If there is one placeq (Score:2, Insightful)
And yet you can walk across all of Asia and a good deal of Europe, from the Pacific to the Baltic, without ever leaving the political bounds of a single nation.
Things that make you go, "Hmmmmmmmmm."
KFG
Re:If there is one placeq (Score:4, Funny)
Europe + Asia (Score:2)
You're probably think of Eurasia [everything2.com].
-kgj
Re:If there is one place (Score:5, Insightful)
--Mark
Re:If there is one placeq (Score:4, Informative)
Re:If there is one placeq (Score:5, Funny)
(with apologies to Monty Python)
Re:If there is one placeq (Score:3, Funny)
The problems (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The problems (Score:5, Insightful)
Something here smells funny (Score:4, Insightful)
But according to Computerwoche and other reports, the city lacks the funds to invest in the planned testing and development of an open-source solution.
They've got about $35 million budgeted for this migration, and they're out of money at the 'testing and development' phase? How did they come up with their replacement cost figures without doing some 'testing'?
Re:Something here smells funny (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The problems (Score:4, Insightful)
like all those made-up news stories about a virus that spreads through a mail reader and causes millions of dollars (if not more) of lost productivity?
Re:The problems (Score:5, Informative)
Linux on the desktop is ready...the only thing holding it back is the inertia of windows users. Linux is at least as good technically on the desktop as Win 98/2000 in many areas much better [just the OS/DE mind you] Sure apps are missing, but they will come. The biggest problem are those pesky "must have" windows drivers or software. If you can convert an office to 100% OO.org [or another] you'd be just fine! My biggest problem getting a tryout of OO.org [in prep for Linux!] was those pesky USERS who simply refused to learn something new...and refused to try! I wouldn't deny growing pains...but if office workers were factory workers they'd all be out of work...for holding up progress!!!
Re:The problems (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The problems (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:The problems (Score:3, Informative)
Now, you can be a fool and trust other people telling you it will work ok, or you can do it the long, boring, but reliable way.
Me, I work in IT, which means the Information is more important than anything. Being a professional, I do the most reliable thing each time. Other people should take the same mindset.
Also, I like the asshole moderators around here. A person cant even have an intellige
Re:The problems (Score:4, Interesting)
1. Your mostly right. A well planned migration can be done, and is a thing of beauty when it happens.
2. In most of the migrations I've done, there is a point of no return. That is to say, rolling back is more work, and more of a problem then finishing the problem. Instantly migrating back can be a huge issue (I've dealt with this on schema's in a database).
3. IMHO, if you interview enough rank and file employee at any company of nearly any size, they will complain about the computers reguardless of the OS, the machine, the software involved. I don't care if it's Linux, OS X, Mac Classic, Amiga, MS Windows 3.1/NT3.X/4.0/2K/XP/CE/ME, OS2, Solaris, AIX, HPUX, IRIX, or raw LPAR's on a mainframe. So talking about "force feeding Linux" and having complaints afterwards isn't a useful datapoint.
In my experience, most peoples objections to Linux are that it's not Windows. That in a lot of ways isn't a complaint I worry about. Most of the people who work at my company, need a web browser to run the application they use all day every day. If it's Mozilla, IE or Opera it really doesn't make any difference at all. All they really get mad about is not being able to go to IE required sites to play games. I double dog dare those people to complain to their boss to make me fix it.
Most people I work with have problems with Windows. If you interviewed them, they'd complain about all sorts of stuff. It known to hang, and/or crash. In my experience, it gives you very little to backtrack to figure out what is causing the problems. (It might be that I don't have the right tools). When I have problems under Linux I generally get a pretty good error message, along with a stack trace and symbols to use to track things down.
Microsoft has wonderful integration between multiple applications. It has incredible abilities to export objects from one app, and past them into another. In my experience, that's also a wonderful way to crash Word/Excel. It's a wonderful way to leak memory. It's a great way to slow those applications to a crawl.
Linux has plenty of rough edges, but in a stand alone environment (where it doesn't have to mix with Win32 formatted documents), and you have limited functionality required (read a limited job description) it can stand up to Windows any day of the week. Can you download a GUI to do family tree stuff, probably not. Can you download a tool deal with the newest goofy scanner that some no name brand has put out, probably not. Can you download some of the goofy little programs that people develop only for Win32? Normally no, you can't.
However, in my experience, if I want a printed document I can do that. If I want a spreadsheet, I can do that. If I want a decent browser, I have one. If I want to read email. There is a plethora of apps to choose from. If I want to customize my desktop I can. If I want music, I can do that. If I want instant messaging, I can do that. If I want VoIP, I can do that. If I want development tools, I have those. If I want a photo manipulation program, there are a couple. If I want to watch movies, I can. If I need various compression/archival/backup programs, I can. If I want to write CD/DVD's I can.
Can you make it run as the primary desktop for employees at a work environment. Sure can, been doing it for 4 years personally. There are some people I can't to do that, but that is primarily because MS propriatary formats are a defacto standard. You just can't deal with people without that. It's annoying, and it's fundamentally bad for the economy (it's limiting competition, and an artificial constraint on increasing effeciency, all of which are bad for the economy). If people exchanged documents in a more open format, it'd be a heck of a lot easier to migrate to a non-windows environment.
Kirby
Re:The problems (Score:3, Insightful)
I have yet to see W2K crash, but I've never run it either. I run plenty of 98 crash and burn, and no clues as to what went wrong. I know plenty of people who run W2K and XP and speak of it's glories. About the only serious downside I've ever heard people talk about the W2K and XP is that there a
Re:The problems (Score:5, Insightful)
Even more interesting is how those many of those interoperability problems were designed into the proprietary software to prevent just such a migration, so that one day their architects could say "look at all the problems that other software is causing!"
Re:The problems (Score:3, Informative)
No news really... (Score:5, Insightful)
"Right now we are proceeding as planned, and we have no hints or signals that the city counsel is regretting or reconsidering their decision to move to Linux,"
Sounds like the normal hitches you'd expect when doing any large-scale migration. Something more detailed would have been nice rather than generalities about 'software compatibility' and 'security'.
dont make a big story out of it... (Score:5, Insightful)
I really hope that everything proceeds as planned.. a project like this is important for the public opinion of Free Software and Linux...
Re:dont make a big story out of it... (Score:3, Insightful)
IBM and SuSe are both involved though, so I am sure everything will go okay in the end
migration (Score:5, Insightful)
Nonetheless, hopefully they persevere.
Re:migration (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Hate to burst everyone's bubble (Score:3, Informative)
Do what we can...how? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Do what we can...how? (Score:5, Insightful)
Write some documentation.
Pretty up some already written documentation.
Answer questions on the newsgroups without griping or insulting people.
If you are German write the politicians praising them for their courage in choosing this solution and vote for them in the next election.
If you are not German then write to them anyway and see if it's legal for you to send them some money. Even five or ten dollars would be a highly effective symbolic gesture.
Re:Do what we can...how? (Score:5, Interesting)
This could have two positive effects:
a) It supports the initiative when foreign dignitaries inquire about the project.
b) It supports such movements in your own region.
Prove it.... (Score:5, Insightful)
What this experiment will have to do is prove that Linux can do it for less money and be more efficient than proprietary solutions such as Windows.
Studies on open-source security, desktop ergonomics and the software components' stability and compatibility with other applications will be included in the process.
For my money, I would have bet on OS X providing a better system from these perspectives.
IBM and Germany-based Linux distributor SuSE are expected to help offset the costs of the migration by supplying technical support and conducting some of the studies that the Munich city council has requested.
This will most likely be of huge importance in maintaining this transition, but more support may be needed in bringing custom applications from Windows to Linux.
Re:Prove it.... (Score:3, Informative)
Huh? Wasn't the final quote from Microsoft much, much less money than the Linux quote? I thought from the start that they took the more expensive choice because it was the better choice. If in order to be successful it must now "prove that Linux can do it for less money" then we've doomed ourselves to failure from the start.
TCO / strategy (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Prove it.... (Score:5, Insightful)
If you recall the winning linux bid actually cost more then the competing windows bid.
I do find it highly unusual that any large entity let alone a governmental one actually chose to spend more money immediately to gain long term benefits though. That kind of thinking is pretty rare these days. I wish them all the luck.
Re:Prove it.... (Score:4, Insightful)
Not really, not in the limited sense you seem to be suggesting anyway. What Linux gets them is freedom from one-size-fits-all solutions, freedom from restrictive license agreements, and freedom from vendor lock-in. It's not easy putting a price tag on these freedoms, since it takes years for them to translate into tangible benefits. It might very well turn out to be more expensive than a proprietary solution and less efficient. But cost isn't the only consideration. Even if cooking yourself is more expensive and less efficient than eating at McDonalds every day, it is still a good idea to cook your own food.
For my money, I would have bet on OS X providing a better system from these perspectives.
Maybe. But OS X still isn't free. Plus, Apple sucks in Europe. It is difficult to find stuff, very expensive, and the service is lousy.
The damnation of the bottom line.... (Score:3, Insightful)
I want to be the owner of my IT infrastructure, both at home and at work (that is my compny or employer), I want to make the decisions of how
And the surprise is? (Score:5, Insightful)
Why all the fuss? Why any fuss? Sounds like business as usual to me.
Jedidiah
Re:And the surprise is? (Score:5, Interesting)
<conspiracy>
maybe it benefits "someone", to make a fuss out of this. so now they can say "SEE! we told you it was no good!"...
</conspiracy>
we just cant really trust the media anymore.. i just trust
Re:And the surprise is? (Score:4, Insightful)
maybe it benefits "someone", to make a fuss out of this. so now they can say "SEE! we told you it was no good!"...
No conspiracy theories needed - the media simply enjoys making a fuss out of anything they can get their hands on. Look at all the deluded reporting that went on accompanying the windows source leak! Or Janet Jackson at the superbowl for that matter. Hype, hype, and hype again. If more people could take a "yeah, whatever. Next please" attitude to all these unnecessary stories we wouldn't be quite so nose in crap.
Jedidiah.
Re:And the surprise is? (Score:2)
You can't pick and choose stories to hit the press, though I guess that if everything was fine and dandy at Munich, there wouldn't be a story in it at all. This is the way things are - it isn;t about Linux doing well, or Linux doing badly - its about stuff that makes people sit up and read it (and therefore look at ads/buy the paper).
Munich Council Press Statement (Score:5, Informative)
Stefan Hauf
Presseamt Muenchen
http://www.muenchen.de
Munich goes with Open Source Software
The city of Munich will use Linux as the operating system for their 14,000 PC clients as well as open source software for their office applications.
With the votes of SPD, Alliance 90/Die Gruenen/Pink list, FDP, OEDP, REP and Party of Democratic Socialism, the town assembly followed Mayor Christian Ude's proposal.
An appraisal given by the city in order to evaluate the pro and cons of a conversion of the present urban standard "Windows NT/Microsoft Office" alternatively on "Windows XP/Microsoft Office" or "Linux/Open Office" comes to the conclusion that there is a clear strategic-qualitative projection/lead for the open source solution.
Mayor Ude: "With this trend-setting decision Munich secures itself as the first major city to have a major portion of its IT infrastructure be supplier-independent and sets also a clear indication of more competition in the software market. The prehistory of this decision already showed that a competitive situation helps the formation of prices pretty well. "
Regarding the decision, mayor Ude pointed out that this is not a decision for a specific IT partner, but a strategic positioning based on a noncommittal market evaluation.
Until spring 2004, a detailed concept of implementation and migration will be developed. Based on the results of this evaluation, the city council will decide how the migration to Linux will take place.
IBM Germany Statement
May 28th 2003
The city council of Munich today made a key decision to deploy the open source operating system Linux instead of alternative operating systems. This initiative will see Germany's third largest city migrate 14,000 desktop and notebook computers to Linux. Their objective is to deploy information technology that stimulates more commercial and technological flexibility at a lower cost to the public sector. Although the council has not made a decision on its choice of vendor, Linux distributor SuSE AG and IBM Germany will be participating in the resulting contract bid.
Walter Raizner, Country General Manager IBM Germany: "In the public sector in Germany we have seen a variety of new implementations of open standards-based software such as Linux. And worldwide, more than 75 IBM government customers - including agencies in France, Spain, UK, Australia, Mexico, the United States and Japan - have now embraced open computing and Linux to save costs, consolidate workloads, increase efficiency and enact e-government transformation. With Munich's decision, one thing is clear - it's open season for open computing. Linux represents freedom and flexibility. This is essential in e-government - they need more flexibility to serve their constituencies better and faster, and freedom of choice to do it at less cost to the public. Munich is leading the way."
Re:Munich Council Press Statement (Score:3, Informative)
You're gonna think this is flamebait (Score:5, Insightful)
But instead of paying $23.7 million for the Microsoft solution, Munich's city council opted to spend roughly $35.7 million to switch to open source, saying that the higher price would be offset by lower costs and more flexibility in licensing fees and software choices over the long run.
That's an initial difference of $12.5 million, or $892 per system. They say that they'll make it up in the long run, but they must really mean long term.
I love linux as much as the next guy, but the duty of this agency is to provide the cheapest solution to server their constinuents. This whole project smells to me like the council had a beef with Microsoft, and allowed that bias to lead to a poor business decision. Now they're trying to justify it so they don't have to admit that they made a mistake.
There are probably organizations that are ready for a wholesale ms to linux migration, but this doesn't look to be one. All of their staff have to be retrained, the price is more expensive, and a considerable custom windows application base seem to make this a bad idea. The linux community can only be hurt by a square peg linux solution being shoved into a circle microsoft hole.
Microsoft is loving this, and preparing marketing material right now that shows that replacing Microsoft with Linux doesn't make business sense. Business realities, not propoganda, should dictate migration to linux. Forcing the issue (as it appears they are doing) only hurts linux in the long run.
Re:You're gonna think this is flamebait (Score:5, Insightful)
Give this project time and it will blossom, and that ~12Mil will be insignificant in comparison to the savings down the road.
Being a pioneer is not easy, and Munich will end up better off in the long run.
Re:You're gonna think this is flamebait (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:You're gonna think this is flamebait (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:You're gonna think this is flamebait (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:You're gonna think this is flamebait (Score:5, Insightful)
This does not matter if they have payed around $12.5 million to SuSE, because that stays within the German economy.
I love linux as much as the next guy, but the duty of this agency is to provide the cheapest solution to server their constinuents
For governments I disgree. The IBM/SuSE option helps SuSE, a German company. To me that is a smart choice.
Re:You're gonna think this is flamebait (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:You're gonna think this is flamebait (Score:5, Insightful)
The tendering procedure (word?) of a govermental project within the EU has to open to any EU company. Neglecting a better bid from another European company is as much a crime as neglecting a better bid from another German company. (And is as hard to prove)
> [...] millions of euro's to an American company when [...]
They do. SuSE has been bought [www.suse.de] by Novell.
Re:You're gonna think this is flamebait (Score:4, Interesting)
In contrast to Microsoft Germany, which has certainly more employees than SuSE? (And was voted Best Employer 2003 in Germany in the +500 employeer category)
In contrast to the assumption most people here make, I'd say the more important fact was that it was backed by IBM. That the relatively small (once) German company SuSE is part of it only sweetened it.
When, say RedHat and HP, placed a similar offer it would have been considered, but the point is, at that time, there was only SuSE and IBM.
SuSE alone wouldn't stand a chance as they surely don't have the man-power.
Re:You're gonna think this is flamebait (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:You're gonna think this is flamebait (Score:5, Insightful)
The change in Munich and in other communities did not happen now, because Linux became suddenly more mature, but because they were all were posed with the same problem.
Re:You're gonna think this is flamebait (Score:4, Funny)
scripsit JoeZeppy:
You clearly have a different definition of `early 1990s' than most of us if you consider 1998 to be `early 1990s'...
Re:You're gonna think this is flamebait (Score:2, Insightful)
They didn't do this based on cost alone. They could've easily went with any other costly solution without anyone batting an eye. The big deal here is that in the higher up levels, they had a series of huge meetings about supporting their local (German) economy instead of the US's and how they didn't want to be locked in, etc. There were probably thousands of
Re:You're gonna think this is flamebait (Score:3, Insightful)
So in 6 months they have to upgrade Office and thats another 12 mil and then in a few months again they have to upgrade something else, ad nauseum, ad infinitum.
By spending upfront now
Re:You're gonna think this is flamebait (Score:2)
Just to inject a little sanity, at 2 million a month that's $142.85 per system. I know microsoft sucks, but they don't suck that bad.
Re:You're gonna think this is flamebait (Score:5, Interesting)
But instead of paying $23.7 million for the Microsoft solution...
Don't forget though that Microsofts initial proposal was $36.6m! Ballmer flew out there do demonstrate how keen MS was to keep Munich's business. MS then subsequentally cut the cost to $31.9m and then finally $23.7m.
A similar thing happened in the UK where Newham Council in London considered migrating away from a MS environment to a Open Source environment. A Linux based desktop (not sure about backend stuff) was designed, built and trialed. MS sponsored an "independent" consultancy firm to do a TCO Investigation which, surprisingly, found that the MS Solution would have a lower TCO. The most interesting aspect of this case is that it became quite high profile in the UK and it soon became apparent that MS where very eager to secure the deal. However, in no small part due to the media exposure this story received, MS where given two choices; either aggresively discount their proposal or risk a humiliating defeat (remember the "Under no circumstances lose to Linux" memo?). Newham Council eventually chose to stick with Microsoft, citing the difficulties of getting a reliable Exchange 5.5 client for Linux, but not before they had secured a deal that was apparently an order of magnitude better than the deal that the UK Govt. has! Not bad for a poverty-stricken East-London Council!
Re:You're gonna think this is flamebait (Score:2, Informative)
Microsoft are in a difficult position - most of their software does everything people want, feature wise. How many people can name what's in Office 2003 over Office 97, or what's the new features in the latest version of Project?
So, Microsoft can't make startling quantum leaps forward because there's nowhere to go - there versions now are like changes to the 100m sprint record.
The OSS guys will be plugging more and more holes, and more busines
It is flamebait (Score:3, Interesting)
$892 per system... but you're talking about hardware and software that will be working until it dies or is completely replaced by a new fleet of systems. To begin with, GNU/Linux (especially SuSE) brings new life to old machines because it works better with older hardware than Windows does. One deciding factor for this choice may have been that Windows XP doesn't support some of their current machines whereas SuSE does. So $892 may have to pay for a whole new computer, OS, and Office license.
While we're on
Re:You're gonna think this is flamebait (Score:5, Insightful)
Every time, as you get into it, you find that some software doesn't work as expected. You have to come up with a workaround and/or a solution. These take some time, slow down the project, whatever.
But a dramatic determining factor in this equation has to do with how mainstream is your problem, and how likely it is someone else will fix it before you do.
The problem I see with Linux is that the dynamics that exist in the Windows market to help with your deployment problems simply don't exist in the Linux market. There are going to be issues that may not be resolved for 3-4 years or more rather than the six month timeframe you see in the Windows market.
It's a chicken & egg situation... that dynamic will change as more people adopt Linux, but if I was a CIO I wouldn't bet my company on it.
You're wrong (Score:5, Insightful)
The right thing, IMHO, is that no state may make itself dependant on a single external (commercial) entity. I would say, no matter what the cost, it is the obligation of any decent government to free themselves of any strangleholds that may exist.
As a side effect, it will be much much cheaper in the long term. Someone must make a first step; after that, the compatability issues shall diminish, and others to follow (e.g. other cities) shall have less problems. Once we are saved from the dictate of proprietary file formats (getting rid of which does cost some money initially) the savings are enormous.
Contrary to quoted companies, states do not only have to look at next quarters financial, i.e. be extremely short sighted, but have to think on timescales of up to 50 years.
Re:You're gonna think this is flamebait (Score:2)
Sounds to me like Microsoft is the one being hurt.
Re:You're gonna think this is flamebait (Score:5, Insightful)
Munich was a long time user of MS software and like other companies/governments, have felt the heavy hand of MS far too often. The MS deal was originally a little more, however the "dancing monkey" didn't want to lose this deal and made that huge cut in the final offer. This type of action is exactly what Munich and many others want to get away from.
If MS could make an offer that was $12+ milllion less, why in the world did they not make that offer from the begining? Because MS wants to suck all the money they can get from you while you are their customer. Forced upgrades, high prices and intentionally making their software incompatible with standards to lock you in. The fact is, is that MS could make a huge profit while still selling their software for much less, not make their software incompatible with non-MS software/standards, not try to force upgrades, etc.
It is my opinion that what Munich is doing _is_ the best chioce. Munich will now control their own IT and not have the heavy hand of MS to deal with. Sure there will be growing pains, however those pains will quickly dissapear and leave Munich with an excellent IT infrastructure that _they_ control.
Re:You're gonna think this is flamebait (Score:5, Insightful)
So please cut down the FUD a bit.
The flow of Tax dollars into Microsoft's pockets (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The flow of Tax dollars into Microsoft's pocket (Score:4, Interesting)
I am reading a proposal from CATSA (the Canadian version of TSA) right now. They are an ENTIRELY MS shop...desktops, servers, directory etc. Not only is that scary, the RFP is to create "secured" web apps that will share personal information, CAD drawing of airports and check points, counts of people passing through those check points and lists of the stuff that has been confiscated between all 89 Canadian airports and CATSA head office in Ottawa.
They want this to run on their existing infrastructure.
The information is CLEARLY classified info (that is, it will be SECRET or even TOP SECRET). There is no way this stuff should be any where near an MS system except maybe for a desktop, and even then, it should be accessed through Moz instead of IE.
I find it absolutely outrageous that MS will make money while putting our national security at risk. I hope they can be convinced to at least store the data on Trusted Solaris....
Since the RFP is still live, you will understand why I post ANON...
I'd like to know how an agency so clearly centered around security has an MS server infrastructure in the first place. I know CSE (Communications Security Establishment - our NSA) and the RCMP don't use Windows except on the desktop, why should CATSA.
Somebody suure sold them a bill of goods.
Munich is important. (Score:3, Insightful)
The fun and games---if they weren't over before, they are now.
Re:Munich is important. (Score:4, Interesting)
As for the fun and games - I don't see why I should care about munich, or IBM, or Joe User, adopting Linux. What made open source what it is today was a combination of enthusiastic hackers writing better software than the corporate drones were allowed to, and companies trying to make money off that software. The companies won't stop trying to earn money, and I don't see a reason why the hackers should stop hacking for fun.
Cost Problems (Score:3, Interesting)
I would also have to think that the city could form a partnership with SuSe. It would be beneficial for the both of them. Maybe they could put up SuSe billboards throughout the city in exchange for discounted software. If Linux companies can form those kind of alliances, windows will be eradicated quickly. Obviously Microsoft can be brought to its knees quickly, as seen from the article!
They also really need to do more studies like the one mentioned in the article. Since Linux can consistently undersell Microsoft, all they need to do is concentrate on studies. Once they improve ease-of-use and ease-of-learning issues and prove that is in fact is easy to use in the studies, Linux will be the OS of choice for the general public.
Business as usual (Score:5, Insightful)
Only the (very vocal)
The real outcome will be in 3 or 4 years. Everything will have been transitioned and shakendown. Then, and only then can we see if has actually been beneficial or not. We can see the parts where a unified Linux base has worked, and where it has failed.
Migrating to Linux (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Migrating to Linux (Score:5, Insightful)
All the damn time I'm reading "Linux isn't ready for the desktop".
I'musing Linux on the desktop.
It works fine. Does this mean I'm doing something wrong? I mean, it's not meant to work, is it?
Linux is ready for the desktop, as shown by the countless people using it on the desktop. Hell, you're at Slashdot, look around you...
The real issue is that Linux isn't ready for mass consumption in the same way that Windows is, but that's largely because people have had Microsoft stuffed down their throats for... ooh... 20 years? Something like that. People have issues with Linux because they're so used to doing everything the Microsoft way. People are taught that computers run Windows, and for 90% of people there is no other OS. Most people wouldn't know what an OS even is! It's inconveivable for computers to run any other way.
There are distro's combatting this though. I mean, first up there's obvious candidate's like Lindows; but things like Redhat (Fedora, whatever) and Mandrake are getting extremely user friendly. For the average end user a decent RedHat install will do most things - e-mail, internet, Office type stuff. It's only the hardcore minority among us that need more complex stuff and thus spend sleepless nights tweaking the kernel, trying to get Wine to run properly, trawling the net for those obscure drivers... But most people never even think about that type of stuff
Long story short - Linux is ready for the desktop, but people just need a bit of re-education to get their head round it, same as a lot of people need education to use Windows in the first place. A lot of end users need training to use Windows in the first place, and then need training with each new version of Windows, so training in Linux shouldn't be too much harder.
Here endeth the lesson.I find it worrying that... (Score:2, Interesting)
If Microsoft is able to get away with this kind of preditory pricing, this will result in a much slower take up of the cheaper OS alternatives. So much for capitalism.
Re:I find it worrying that... (Score:4, Insightful)
This IS WHAT CAPITALISM IS ALL ABOUT -- COMPETITION. I don't care whose product we use, I just want it to work, and I want it to be fairly priced. And guess what -- we (the linux community) are the sole reason for getting microsoft to drop their prices. We are now COMPETITIVE. This is huge. This is what capitalism is all about. MS can't strongarm every company in the world for too much longer. You can now threaten them with the big L word or the big blue.
This is incredible. Others are going to see that MS can have lower prices, and we can now negotiate with the devil.
Re:I find it worrying that... (Score:5, Insightful)
In basic economics this is Microsoft attempting to eat into the consumer-surplus. It is anti-competitive and hence anti-capitalist.
You are right in that Linux is now competiting with Microsoft enough that they are having to lower their prices, which is a good thing. However, Microsofts response simply negates any competition Linux may pose, since they can lower prices for the few individuals who do threaten to swap until they promise not to and buy into the current lock-in situation. We'd have to wait until 10% of Microsoft's customers threaten to swap simultaniously for it to effect Microsofts bottom line.
Re:I find it worrying that... (Score:3, Informative)
> since in a free-market situation you have to sell each product for the same price to all customers
Where did you get that idea? Do I have to sell the same product to my concurrent for the same price? Do I have to sell it to small buyer to the same price as to a quantity buyer? Do I have to sell it to the same price to a celebrity than I sell it to Mr Smith.
The city of Munic, a quantity buyer and relatively known entity decided to buy from a differe
Re:I find it worrying that... (Score:4, Informative)
This is how tenders happen. Bidders get one chance at offering a price. That MS lowered their price after they heard someone elses means that a) they have insane amounts of profit and/or b) their new price will cut lots of corners. Now, software isn't something like construction where a shaved down bit might produce a building that falls down... The incremental cost to MS is zero, once the R&D is done. But the same general logic applies. That MS came back with a lower price, Im sure, solidified the plan to go with Linux. They were clearly trying to screw Munich with their first price.
Ignoring that the loosing bidder was MS for a second, they deserved to loose, their second bid not withstanding.
But, the bidder was not just a random company trying to screw Munich, it was Microsoft. Microsoft is a monopoly. Being a monopoly isnt illegal. Some specific acts arnt illegal in general. However, a monopoly that performs those specific acts is breaking the law. One of those is dumping. While we dont know MS's cost for this project (and that is largely meaningless in this zero-incremental cost industry), we do know that their second try was lower then the competition. Additionaly, the (winning) linux bid had some non-zero cost items. Retraning. Redevelopement of custom software, amongst others Im sure.
Monopolies are not allowed to set prices intentional lower then is possible for the competition.
Re:I find it worrying that... (Score:3, Interesting)
If Microsoft is able to sell the same software to different parties at different prices (ie the maximum price that party is willing to pay without swapping) then there is no hope
OktoberLinux? (Score:2, Funny)
Where do I sign?
Money and Freedom (Score:4, Insightful)
The most important thing to a public administration should be citizens, and there are a few issues that propietary software doesn't do for citizens. First of all, doesn't let to audit the code, and this is a problem when you manage sensible information. Another thing that Microsoft don't does for Munich citizens is promoting local software industry, here in Europe, apart from free vs. propietary software we have another problem. Import vs. local development. Linux es the only horse we can ride. And it's from european origin, also
More money, maybe, but why spend this money in a foreign industry when you can spend it developing the local software industry?
Biggest problem ? (Score:5, Interesting)
This is concerning special administrative software that has to be (frequently) updated when regulations change. As I read elsewhere, vendors are not willing (or reluctant) to come up with LINUX solutions.
A chance for startups, I guess.
CC.
Looks bad from what I heard in munich (Score:5, Interesting)
I am not sure how far he really is into the subject but from what I know from living in munich for 20 years now is that the city is cutting back on finances, and that there was more than one project that wasn't really thought through before making the decision. I really, really hope they can handle it, but the latest relaunch of www.muenchen.de [muenchen.de], the cities new online-portal, was a catastrophe (a friend of mine worked at the project) and if that's any indication than they might be in trouble...I don't have any inside information, I am just stating what I learned from watching the "Rathaus" through the years as a munich citizen...
Lispy
I just reread my post (Score:5, Insightful)
My point was that in Germany we have had a recent tendency to rush things. There are numoerous examples, the launch of the UMTS-Network debacle (highspeed mobile network), the Transrapid [transrapid.de](a magnetic monorail) fiasco in China and, worst of all, the tollcollect [toll-collect.de] (a sattelite based system to charge on traffic) desaster. All of these projects were ambitious and technically challenging and all of them have a long history of failure and mismanagement. I really love this city and I appreciate the brave decision of the city council to try the switch. But I have this fear that they will blow it and Munich will not be known as the "Linux-Capitol" but rather as the "bad example". Keep your fingers crossed that I am wrong!!
btw: here's a link to the english page of muenchen.de [munich.de].
Good night.
Lispy
Re:Looks bad from what I heard in munich (Score:3, Insightful)
But you forget that they have the support contract from SuSE and IBM. These two companies knows the high profile of Munich and I am confident they won't let it slip. Even if the Munich IT people are not the top of the crop, they can call IBM and SuSE when things get tricky, two reliable computer companies that I would have much more confidence in when making a support call than MS any day.
Whoaa, that's just the licensing (Score:5, Interesting)
the mistake is in making a mass migration (Score:5, Insightful)
I understand peoples fear of uncertainty and their inclination towards organizing everything to avoid "chaos" but making a project of that scale is really just a nice way of deluding yourself. It will be chaos regardless.
If you want to migrate a disrtibuted organization of 14,000 desktops and unkown amount of servers from one operating system to another you do it by setting an enterprise standard and then knocking it out one project, system, or group at a time. Hell even microsoft didnt do a mass migration from their old unix desktops to their own operating system en masse, they migrated slowly where it made sense and pushed the remainder.
I will not be suprised if this project partially fails.
Oh, how right you are. (Score:3, Interesting)
*sigh*
Re:the mistake is in making a mass migration (Score:2)
Isn't it ironic... (Score:2)
Tough--from experience (Score:5, Insightful)
I have set up in the past a Linux intranet servce in a Windows IT environment, precisely because I thought that it would be "better" in the long run to work with Tomcat/Apache/Linux than WebLogic/WebSphere/Windows.
The basic set-up was very easy, as always. But soon we got into things related to security & authorizations, for which we needed to interface with Active Directory... I'm glad we had some time to do this right. "Active Directory access from Java over LDAP with Kerberos authentication to a Win2K domain controller" is very sparsely and partially documented, and then what you can find on the net relates to earlier versions of software, other distros... A lot of testing and trying with some very good people on the task, and finally we got it off the ground. It's not the kiddie-script grade stuff or burn-a-distro-and-enjoy story we like to hear.
This was in a top-tier R&D lab, with research-grade time on our hands. Basically our core business. Now I'm not sure the municipal office of Munich can do these kinds of things themselves... And if they hire consultants to do it for them, you can be pretty sure they'll take advantage of their unawareness.
In that particular case, we got for a short period of time a MS Consulting dude to help us. The poor guy knew less about MS' own products than us! Now imagine the same guy "advising" the Munich city office on how to better interoperate with Microsoft's products.
Here's the timeline
1- City of Munich goes Linux
2- City of Munich realizes during the migration it will need to interoperate with Windows
3- City of Munich to MS: one more thing, guys... before we ditch you, how do we interoperate with your products exactly? No, not for us (we don't do, we make others do), but we need to tell our IT subcontractors.
4- IT subcontractors blame bad interop on MS, who blames it back on these sloppy-Linux-hackers--and meanwhile, computers kaputt
5- ???
6- One good "TCO" sell point for MS?
Coincidence: IBM Wants to Port Office to Linux? (Score:3, Funny)
Sounds to me like Munich is having second thoughts about not keeping Office.
So, whats new (Score:5, Insightful)
So, Microsoft is in no position to gloat over any Linux setbacks in Munich.
This is a problem that probably has more to do with leadership, management methods than with any specific technology like Linux or Windows.
Even if the up front cost for switching to Linux turns out to be higher than expected, it will probably be cheaper in the long run. Using Linux they will be in much better control of their future upgrade costs.
Not to mention that, money spent on Linux stays in the local economy instead of feeding a foreign company.
Resistance costs money... (Score:5, Interesting)
We tried to keep the look and feel exactly the same. But we had complaints from users about things as trivial as button sizes. The application didn't look the same. And of course anything that goes wrong after a change is blamed on the change even if it is totally unrelated. It's just human nature I guess.
Anyhow, we spent a lot of wasted time during the convention dealing with bogus user complaints. It just goes with the territory. You have to do it to keep the users happy and you should do it with a smile on your face.
This change was no where nearly as drastic as switching from Windows to Linux. I can just imagine what the poor IT people are going through. All I can say is: Hang in there. Do what you need to do to keep the users as happy as possible. Things will get better and once use to Linux they won't want to go back to Windows anymore.
You trolls are all missing the point (Score:3, Interesting)
All they have to do is ask? (Score:5, Interesting)
If you had the typical windows IT shop they would attempt this by trying to deploy linux as you would windows which is not the way to do it. Linux in a business or government environment should always be deployed thin client. Remember the MS deployment model is geared towards "selling licenses" and not efficency.
Any open source user is a friend of mine!
Re:All they have to do is ask? (Score:4, Insightful)
The biggest problem isn't the initial Linux installs, it's that every middle manager has their own pet software usually Excel sheets with crappy macros, or commercial canned Access programs....All that stuff is most difficult to get working. Sure you can use Wine, but the point is that you don't know till you get there what they were using. On top of that Mid-managers espically are resistant to change...or redoing their work.[unless of course they deem it ememgency!] even if it saves the department money in the long run!
Europe is growing rapidly; Wild Wild East ! (Score:5, Insightful)
Germany is right in the middle of this. Strategicly the OSS/Linux vendors are in for a bonus few years.
You can guarantee that IBM, Novell and SuSE will all want to make this work out fine because they would then sell this solution on.
You have to ask youself - why spend hard earned EU taxpayer money on Microsoft licenses when it can be spent on local service providers integrating freely available OSS software ?. IBM Global Service are asking that same question - pity SCO are not getting stuck in too as their traditional strength in vertical integration would be perfect for the new EU countries, but now no-one will touch them with a barge pole.
On the issue of cost (Score:5, Insightful)
Free software doesn't compete with proprietary software on cost, reliability, performance or features. It's not even really appropriate to use the word compete, since the metric of success is so different for free software than for proprietary products. A proprietary product succeeds when it makes money. But when does free software succeed? When it attracts a lot of users, maybe. But what does that accomplish?
Well, it liberates users. The goal of proprietary software is to make money. The goal of free software is to liberate users. Not to make cheaper software, or even better software (although we try), but to make users more free. Any other motive just does not survive contact with reality. Nobody starts their project with the idea of making a cheaper widget. Most people start their project with the idea of making a better widget, but this seems to be a very elusive and highly subjective quality. The truth is we don't know how to make "better" software any more than the proprietary people do.
The benefit of free software is not that it's cheaper or better, since these are after the fact rationalizations at best and misleading fantasies at worst. The benefit is that it frees users from mindlessly protectionist policy, draconian restrictions on use and distribution, and a whole universe of demeaning do-not-trust-the-customer attitudes.
This freedom might be more expensive than the alternative, or it might be less expensive in the long run, or it might lead to better software, or not: these are issues that are infinitely malleable in the hands of a skilled advocate. But it all derives from the motive of freedom -- not the mere availability of source code.
Re:This is n't bad news (Score:5, Informative)