The Man Behind Munich's Migration of 15,000 PCs From Windows To Linux 264
An anonymous reader writes "It's one of the biggest migrations in the history of Linux, and it made Steve Ballmer very angry: Munich, in southwest Germany, has completed its transition of 15,000 PCs from Windows to Linux. It has saved money, fueled the local economy, and improved security. Linux Voice talked to the man behind the migration: 'One of the biggest aims of LiMux was to make the city more independent. Germany’s major center-left political party is the SPD, and its local Munich politicians backed the idea of the city council switching to Linux. They wanted to promote small and medium-sized companies in the area, giving them funding to improve the city’s IT infrastructure, instead of sending the money overseas to a large American corporation. The SPD argued that moving to Linux would foster the local IT market, as the city would pay localcompanies to do the work.' (Linux Voice is making the PDF article free [CC-BY-SA] so that everyone can send it to their local councilors and encourage them to investigate Linux)."
Governments need the source code (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Governments need the source code (Score:4, Interesting)
You don't get to put Windows on a warship without the DoD being able to see what it does.
Re:Governments need the source code (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
"have access to" or "can independantly build new systeml from source"?
I wouldn't trust Microsoft to provide the complete or even correct source, NDA or not.
Re: (Score:3)
You don't get to put Windows on a warship without the DoD being able to see what it does.
Actually, you don't get to put Windows on a warship, period.
They're all running Linux/Unix/Custom OS
Re:Governments need the source code (Score:4, Interesting)
"Actually, you don't get to put Windows on a warship, period."
While it was only a test bed, the USS Yorktown (USN cruiser) was using Windows NT in a test capacity and in 1997 a divide-by-zero error took down the integrated control, navigation, engine and machinery monitoring systems.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
I always laugh at those that say we need to "read the source code" [youtube.com] - with apologies to Rep. Conyers.
TAANSTAFL. (Score:2)
At the cost of maintaining your own IT department or an ongoing contract with a third party.
Even with the source code, there could be vulnerabilities - that nobody knows about. Look how long Heartbleed existed before it was discovered more-or-less by happenstance.
TANSTAAFL
Re: (Score:2)
At the cost of maintaining your own IT department or an ongoing contract with a third party.
Yes, because Windows just runs fine without IT departments? Talk to me when everyone is issued smartphones instead of computers and then you might have a point.
Re: (Score:2)
You imagine governments are staffed with computer professionals capable and motivated to worry about their OS being compiled by the Mfg.?
At what level of government do you imagine would be performing code reviews and building their own OS images? Federal? State? County? Municipal? Here's a better idea, keep government worker desktops off the Internet, then it doesn't really matter how vulnerable a desktop OS is if there is an air-gap between it and the internet.
Re: (Score:2)
The US government is actually staffed by tens of thousands of computer professionals. The problem is that only a select few get to analyze the Windows source code for problems.
Here is an even better idea. Just give people iPads or android tablets and forget about desktop OSes altogether unless you are running specialized software for engineering or something specific. In which case you can probably run Linux or Macs.
Since no one reads the story - MS was cheaper! (Score:3, Informative)
This was not a decision based on cost, it was based on functionality - being able to invest in their platform and implement exactly what they wanted was worth the additional expense, in large part because they committed to investing the money that would have gone towards US license fees into the local economy.
Re: (Score:2)
Keep reading to the end ...
Short-term costs...LONG TERM savings! (Score:4, Informative)
You conveniently left out this part of the article:
In the short term - they would have saved. However over the 10+ years since initial migration, they've saved and estimated 10 million Euros:
Here is an english article [h-online.com] discussing that publicly released report. For the actual german report. see here [ris-muenchen.de]
Re: (Score:2)
I call bullshit on their training claims. Staff that used Windows at previous jobs or at home will have a lower training needs. They also assume that staff time is free and ignore any lost productivity or errors from their new OS and applications.
Re: (Score:3)
Training people to use Linux is pretty simple unless they're dense. I've known quite a lot of nontechnical people who, when presented with LXDE or similar, go "oh, okay, this is pretty easy" and proceed to do all their shit just like they did before, except the slashes go the other way.
Re: (Score:3)
Dense, no, they are government workers.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree. I would go furthur. If your users are even aware there is a filesystem or locations for them to save work, you have a problem. Define workflow, manage it, and make it obvious what you expect them to do and why.
Re:Short-term costs...LONG TERM savings! (Score:5, Insightful)
I call bullshit on their training claims. Staff that used Windows at previous jobs or at home will have a lower training needs. They also assume that staff time is free and ignore any lost productivity or errors from their new OS and applications.
Two Words:
Metro Desktop
Oh, you mean I'm supposed to learn to deal with this thing (and the Ribbon) for FREE?
Re: (Score:3)
I call bullshit on their training claims. Staff that used Windows at previous jobs or at home will have a lower training needs.
Uh, how many training hours do you think were wasted converting users to the "ribbon" interface of Office 2007? Windows had a menu interface that worked, and admins could even customize shortcut menus on top if the workers needed specific access to common buttons, rather than digging through menus. But then there was a redesign... either you upgrade and retrain, or you deal with an inability to adequately use the new file formats when you need to communicate with others.
And that's just one significant r
Re: (Score:2)
When they decided, their best information AT THE TIME was that Linux was the more expensive, yet preferable option.
If they simply looked at cost (which they didn't) they would have gone with MS.
Hindsight is only available after the fact, I was commenting on the inputs they had to their original decision. That they would ultimately save money was, at best, a leap of faith when they committed to Linux over MS WinXP. They saw (and have since realized) many reasons to choose Linux and did.
Not only that... (Score:5, Interesting)
http://www.itnews.com.au/News/... [itnews.com.au]
.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
"Screwed" because MS only supported their OS for 13 years? Riiiight. Which Linux company is going to maintain a version of their OS (for free) for 13 years? Hell, which Linux company is going to maintain a version of their OS (for free) for 3 years?
That's one of the main reasons my company won't consider Linux on the desktop.
Re:Not only that... (Score:5, Insightful)
"Screwed" because MS only supported their OS for 13 years? Riiiight.
They still sold brand new Windows XP licenses till Win 7 was ready in order to get a foothold into the netbook/subnotebook market and that was not full 4 years ago (Debian LTS is 5 years with free upgrades). The 13 years only counts if you had it from day one, in which case the pain of pre service pack 1 Windows XP would have screwed you at the beginning instead of the end.
Re:Not only that... (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Not only that... (Score:5, Informative)
"Screwed" because MS only supported their OS for 13 years?
But also sold it on some new machines as recently as 4 years ago...
Hell, which Linux company is going to maintain a version of their OS (for free) for 3 years?
Err...several, for free, for considerably more than 3 years.
Common examples:
Ubuntu LTS: Now 5 years (increased from 3 years at V12.04)
CentOS: Pretty much follows Red Hat. e.g CentOS V6 maintained for 9 years (2011-2020).
Given that XP was atypical with 13 years support and Win7 gets 11 years (2009-2020), CentOS is very much in the same ballpark.
But wait: CentOS 6 will get 9 years of *full* support (including new hardware support every 6 months and new features mainly every 2 years). Win7 only gets 6 years full support and 5 years extended (security updates only).
I'd say that's a draw between CentOS 6 and Windows 7.
Re:Not only that... (Score:5, Interesting)
There was also transition to Linux and... back (Score:2)
Open Source Advocates Angry at German Gov't Decision
May 13, 2011
The German Foreign Office first started using Linux as a server platform in 2001 before making Linux and open source software their default desktop choice in 2005. Most observers thought the move a success. However, the government will now transition back to Windows XP, to be followed by Windows 7, also dropping OpenOffice and Thunderbird in favor of MS Office and Outlook.
http://www.pcworld.com/article... [pcworld.com]
Re:There was also transition to Linux and... back (Score:4, Interesting)
They where using ancient versions of thunderbird and openoffice because of internal rules that didn't allowed upgrades... by doing this, of course any interoperability problem would get worst each year. They even report that updating most software would solve most problems...
So it was not a open source problem directly, but a internal planning and rules that caused the problems. I'm just guessing, but i suspect that the one that made the "no updates" rule didn't knew anything about computers or was already secretly preparing everything to cause problems and propose later a migration.
"It has saved money..." (Score:3)
I think they made a smart decision that keeps their money in their borders, but the "calculations" as the main proponent of the migration used are really bent towards Linux.
Just one example would be that he considered the cost and effort to retrain people from Windows XP to Linux and the cost and effort to train people to already using XP to Windows 7 would be equal.
That's ridiculous.
Again, it's a smart decision, but not because of saving money - but instead keeping the money circulating in your own economy. It may ultimately save money due to increased tax revenues but that's a tough one to figure.
Cost RTFA (Score:5, Informative)
2. Customizable security was one of the pros of switching to Linux.
3. Initial costs were projected over 5 years.
4. 10 years have now past and the city made an assesment of cost. Conclusion was 10 mllion euros saved.
5. HP made there own analysis and concluded that the Linux conversion had cost the city 60 million Euros more. However, when contacted for their methodology and numbers for the analysis, they declined to provide the information.
Only One Thing to Say About This (Score:2)
nannyware and other excuses (Score:3)
Nearly everyone fights change. In the absence of good reasons, MS will desperately push out slanted, factually incorrect studies with huge omissions. And it works. Local governments gratefully seize on these as the excuses to keep their old Windows systems.
Software is a big excuse. For example, somehow, computers in the public library can't simply be connected to the Internet, no. They have to have nannyware. On further inquiry, it turns out that such software has to be approved, and approval is a lengthy process. Naturally, the approved nannyware is Windows only. (What nannyware is there for Linux?) They will wax poetic about how they don't want the town to be sued because Little Johnny saw something inappropriate on a computer at the library. Yes, Little Johnny's eyes are why they can't switch away from Windows, even in the back office in city hall.
The most likely way to get the local politicians and bureaucrats to move on something like that is to make them more afraid of not doing it. Repeat, over and over, that Windows is much less secure. Ask them if they'd enjoy being sued because Big John had his passwords intercepted on a library computer. Or sued because hackers broke into their database and got all their information about property owners in the town. Would they enjoy being another Target? Saving money also gets their attention, but not as much as fear.
You'd think that the military, an organization that is under constant attack, would want more security than Windows has. Maybe more than plain Linux, maybe SELinux, or OpenBSD. Or make their own, which they can afford to do. But no. The soldiers are mostly young men who grew up with PCs that had Windows installed. The officers will argue that it is also important that soldiers be able to do their jobs, and that's why they have to have Windows, because that's what they know. Train them on other OSes? Never! The officers aren't experts with computers either, and will demand contradictory and downright stupid things of any proposed replacement. They will also want to be in control, and try to keep everything secret, thus virtually guaranteeing that any project they launch will fail. Though they have the resources, their ability to make their own is poor. Another excuse in the US is the home grown argument. MS is American, Linux is not. Who knows what hacks some foreigners might have inserted in Linux, as if, unlike MS's code, they can't check the source themselves, and as if MS never outsources any software engineering work or hires foreigners.
Open government ... (Score:2)
Munich is in South-East Germany (Score:4, Insightful)
Geography 101 (Score:5, Informative)
Munich is in the southeast of Germany.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Would seriously like a person or two to explain what exactly the reasoning behind this phenomenon is, if indeed there is any.
It's lack of pedantry.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:GNU/Linux (Score:5, Insightful)
1) People prefer easy to use names. "GNU/Linux" is an awkward mouthful, "Linux" is a nice simple name. For the same reason people refer to the "Tesla Model S" as "Model S", or simply a "Tesla", since the S is the more common model here.
2) "Linux" has been the most commonly used name from day 1, and that's not going to change, for the same reason that the public will continue to take "hacker" to mean someone who breaks into computer systems.
Re: (Score:3)
It's not a genericised trademark, per se, but the term "Linux" is now used to describe the whole, incorrect or not.
Re: GNU/Linux (Score:3)
I think you have it reversed. The OS was originally called "Linux", and it included a kernel, GNU user space tools, MIT's X-windows system, some BSD api's, and later Apache web servers, etc. There was a Linux kernel, but also an entire Linux distro.
It was only years later that RMS tried to retroactively name someone else's project with his organization's name, and that's one reason there's resistance there. Now the Linux kernel has "kernel" dropped and people try to say "Linux" only refers to that part.
Re: (Score:2)
I think you're just trolling. Seriously? You're annoyed that common usage of a term has diverged from its original correct usage? Better rip out about 90% of your dictionary and burn it then. So operating systems using the Linux kernel have become known as Linux in common parlance; how infuriating. I tell you, I am completely fascinated to know what other earth-threatening evils are giving you ulcers right now.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Linux is a kernel. Why do people continue to call GNU/Linux (i.e. the whole system) To me it's like if you were to call the Tesla Model S "Goodyear" or something because it had Goodyear tires.
Well if you're going for a car analogy then Linux is obviously the engine, not the tires so you're painfully trying to avoid the flaws in your own argument. And GNU is not the rest, not for the user. What they see is the chassis and the interior. which might be called KDE or GNOME or XFCE. GNU is more like the gearbox, suspension and steering column - you wouldn't want to try to drive without them but to most people they're just hidden middleware. And it's what everybody has and uses, would you say "I've bo
Re: (Score:2)
Because Linus referred to it as Linux when he released his kernel, and when other people added a large number of GNU utilities to that kernel and called it an OS they simply perpetuated the name.
Any thoughts of a greater "conspiracy" is a wasted effort - maybe if RMS had actually focused on writing his own kernel instead of taking a decade to decide on the "proper" kernel his suite of software utilities and another decade to write the kernel [wikipedia.org] then it would be regarded as something more than a set of tools ad
Re: (Score:2)
but I find myself being even more annoyed, at this point, by people calling GNU/Linux Linux... Linux is a kernel. Why do people continue to call GNU/Linux (i.e. the whole system) by the name of the kernel it uses? Would seriously like a person or two to explain what exactly the reasoning behind this phenomenon is, if indeed there is any.
I have two theories. /.
1. It is convenient and only annoy a tiny minority.
2. It is a sinister conspiracy with you as the target of the clandestine organization THEY (affiliated with Illuminati, Scientology, Bert and Ernie) with the single purpose of annoying you on a every time you visit
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And you still call your TV "Television", your car "Automobile" or "horseless carriage", your ATM "Automated Teller Machine", Fax "Facsimile", Kleenex "Tissue", Xerox "photocopy", etc. right?
People abbreviate things over time. It is efficiency or an optimization in time spent communicating: long words slowly become shorter words; usually a few syllables for convenience's sake.
Re:I wonder about man hour figures... (Score:5, Informative)
This is arguably even easier in Linux than in Windows because there are no particular licensing issues with just copying a Linux installation or with how many Linux installations are deployed. One's backend servers are now for updating and package management rather than for licensing.
And with Microsoft deciding to change their UI every few years now, coupled with competing UIs from Apple and Google, it's much easier to change people to a diffrent platform when they have to learn a new UI anyway. Had Microsoft kept variants of the Windows 95 UI going past Windows 7 then it would be harder, but with the Metro debacle it's a lot easier to make that change, and since most users won't go deeper than the UI anyway it's not so bad.
The hardest part is training the support staff if they've been Windows-centric their whole careers. Somehow just reiterating that everything-is-a-file isn't enough, and many professionals struggle to understand UNIX-style paths.
Re:I wonder about man hour figures... (Score:4)
many professionals struggle to understand UNIX-style paths
Wait, really?
There are IT professionals who have trouble with the idea that /home/entropius/widgets is a subdirectory of /home/entropius, and so on?
Re:I wonder about man hour figures... (Score:5, Informative)
Well, what drive is it on?
There's no worring about C: or D: or E: in Linux. It's all one filesystem.
Why is my thumb drive copied to the hard disk when I put it in?
What makes you think it is?
Why does Loinox use the wrong slashes?
Some might say that DOS/Windows is using the wrong ones because Unix-style paths' predate the use of "\" by Windows.
Re: (Score:2)
And yes, people do have these problems. I work with Windows admins and while good at Windows, they don't quite grok UNIX-type filesystems and design, referring to the root partition as the 'root drive' or even 'C: drive'.
How is this possible? It doesn't make any sense, unless the people you're talking about are complete idiots who shouldn't be administering anything, including Windoes.
I guess I could sort of understand this if you were talking about DOS or Windows prior to the past 15 years or so.
But modern Windows actually acts like the various drives are "subdirectories" under "My Computer" in some ways (at least in appearance). And any actual admin would understand the idea of mapping a "network drive," which could
Re: (Score:2)
Well, what drive is it on? /, and your CD gets connected at /media/cdrom, your thumbdrive at /media/usb, and so on.
Tell them: in this OS there is one filesystem, and the stuff on your drives is attached to various places on it. So you might have one drive at
Why is my thumb drive copied to the hard disk when I put it in?
It's not -- it's attached somewhere to the filesystem.
Why does Loinox use the wrong slashes?
Because / means divide, and it's a directory divider.
Seriously, if you can't understand this after
Re: (Score:2)
Do people really get degrees in IT fields without studying Unix?
Serious question -- I'm a scientist and everybody works with it at some time or other, and a computational physics course using C on Linux is standard fare. At the grad school I went to, there were shared Linux workstations in all the graduate student offices, just as a matter of course, and if you didn't know how to use them you figured it out.
Can you really get a whole degree in computers without touching Unix?
Re:I wonder about man hour figures... (Score:5, Insightful)
You've hit on what I consider to be Microsoft's biggest problem: they are no longer making basic functional improvements to their products. Instead, they are adding bells and whistles, and changing file formats to force upgrades (if your clients have ver XYZ+1, then you need it to read the default format of the files they send you).
To me, this indicates a change in attitude. No longer are they striving to put out the best software, they're churning revs to keep revenue up. It's a sign of desperation and it has been going on for several years, now.
Re: (Score:2)
No longer are they striving to put out the best software
I'm sorry, did I miss something? When were they ever trying to put out the best software? "Bottom line" has always been the bottom line with M$
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Somehow just reiterating that everything-is-a-file isn't enough, and many professionals struggle to understand UNIX-style paths.
What? Really? You think the windows traditional
C:\"Documents and Settings"\USERNAME
is easier and more expressive then /home/USERNAME
Then there is the stupid "My Documents" concept. I once helped a secretary find a document she stored under "My Documents" and she couldn't understand why it wasn't there. She was on a different computer but thought since the abstract thingy "My Documents" was right in front she that it was her documents.
Re:I wonder about man hour figures... (Score:4, Insightful)
You are WAY over simplifying the mystical licensing systems in Windows. It is one of the most confusing things to manage, and yes I know what I am doing.
Second, I never really understand this training with office products. The best training you can give anyone is to teach them to stop using office products becuase the last thing a company needs is a bunch of random content producers. Get your work into a content management system (and NO that is not Sharepoint), and force workers to only create content as it specifiucally relates to their job, and not via word processors and spreadsheets.
Re:I wonder about man hour figures... (Score:5, Insightful)
> How hard do you imagine MS software licensing is?
With Linux I don't have to deal with this bullshit at all, ever.
Re: (Score:2)
Spoken like a man who's never used RHEL.
Re:I wonder about man hour figures... (Score:5, Funny)
If only the linux community could come up with some kind of "packaging" mechanism that would make software deployment easier.
This "package" could be comprised of compressed files that the OS could then "copy" to relevant locations on the system. I don't want to get to Star Treked out but perhaps we could then send these "packages" over the network to computers, instead of manually copying the files on our tape drives like we do right now.
If only Red Hat or one of the other distros had a system like this in place, it would make Linux so much more competitive. Perhaps Microsoft has a patent on this new technology?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Perhaps Microsoft has a patent on this new technology?
Amazon has a provisional patent for this in the pipeline I hear.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
??? no scalable tools???
Where do you think Microsoft got theirs?
LDAP, Kerberos, DNS...
I've worked with UNIX systems for 40 years now. And with thousands of machines is trivially doable once there is an organization standardization to do so.
Re: (Score:2)
Canonical offers a comprehensive management suite for desktops and servers, that in may ways compares with Windows AD and associated tools. Canonical charges about $200-250/system per year (I assume volume discounts are available, but I'm not privy to them), while annual software license costs for most MS software users is well under that number (for example, schools can get client OS license, MS Office, server CALs, and misc other MS software for $35/desktop per year).
There are other options, including "ro
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Cheaper beer (Score:5, Informative)
And you took that out of context. That was on the initial 5 year plan, where moving to linux was a big migration, while moving to windows XP from windows 2000 would have had far less impact.
So of course in the first years such a massive migration and education of your users costs more. But now 10+ years later they estimate they saved money (and that was also mentioned in the part where they mentioned that linux was more expensive. For the 5 year plan microsoft was cheaper, but strategically they were pretty sure linux would be cheaper after that).
Re:Cheaper beer (Score:5, Insightful)
So of course in the first years such a massive migration and education of your users costs more.
Yep, higher cost, but the money stayed in the local economy. IMHO, that's the most important aspect of all, even if it had cost more after 5 years.
Re: (Score:3)
Like companies should do instead of outsourcing to other countries?
Outsourcing should be illegal, it's killing nice paying jobs (and the economy, but MBAs and PHBs don't think long-term anymore)
Re: (Score:3)
Don't people in other countries have a right to work, too? Tribalism, faugh.
Not that it doesn't make sense for a city to consider its larger picture... it certainly does. Tax money shipped to the US is gone. If they spend the same money locally, some of it will come back to the city, particularly when you include the ripple effects from that money flowing around the local economy. So the net actual cost can be lower, even if it's higher on paper... and if the outlays are smaller and local, then the city b
Re:Cheaper beer (Score:4, Informative)
It's the intention and effect that outsourcing to other countries usually has. Namely:
Intention -- searching for those who will work for the least, in countries that have more relaxed environmental regulations and to avoid taxes
Effect -- increased localized unemployment, a "race to the bottom" on wages, damage to the environment and government budget crises
If you're outsourcing things because it makes sense -- i.e. not every country can produce their own efficiently -- then that's not a problem. Doing it for the other reasons is what causes vast problems.
Oh and for extra bonus craptasticness -- it's unsustainable in the long run.
Re: (Score:2)
Whoops it cut out part of my statement because it thought I was trying to insert HTML code. That should read:
If you're outsourcing things because it makes sense -- i.e. not every country can produce their own (insert specific niche agricultural product here) efficiently -- then that's not a problem. Doing it for the other reasons is what causes vast problems.
Re: (Score:2)
Intention -- searching for those who will work for the least, in countries that have more relaxed environmental regulations and to avoid taxes Effect -- increased localized unemployment, a "race to the bottom" on wages, damage to the environment and government budget crises
That's one local, short term effect.
The non-local short term effect is increasing wages in the other country. With increasing wealth comes increasing desire for a clean environment, etc., or do you think that people in other countries are inherently less interested in those things than you are? They aren't, they just don't yet have the means to pay attention to them, because they're focused on survival. As their wealth rises that will change... which if you care about the environment is a Very Good Thing,
Re: (Score:2)
But refusing to pay foreign workers just because their foreign, even when it does make more sense economically, is just tribalism and we should stop it.
So what you are saying, if there is somebody else who can do the job, I should immediately give it to him, instead of even trying to do it myself? If somebody else knows something I do not, I shouldn't learn it?
That's just ridiculous.
Trying to do something on your own is not tribalism. Failing, and still refusing to call an outsider, is.
Re: (Score:2)
So what you are saying, if there is somebody else who can do the job, I should immediately give it to him, instead of even trying to do it myself?
If he can do it cheaper, or better, or faster, why would you not? If considerations other than who he is drive you to do it yourself, well and good. But if you're keeping it local merely because he's "other", that's tribalism.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, tribalism. If you can get what you done need for $1 per hour, and get it done just as well/quickly/etc., you should do it, and invest the savings in other parts of your enterprise (whatever that may be). Choosing to pay more merely so you can pay the money to your own tribe is tribalism.
We're all humans, and no tribe is inherently more deserving than any other.
Re:Cheaper beer (Score:4, Insightful)
No, we should value our neighbor more than some remote individual in another country. Besides the ethical and moral considerations, there are practical ones as well. If your neighbor has a job, he will not have to steal from you to survive. there will be networks effects where the area improves as more people have moeny and spend it. look at urban renewal efforts where as people see improvements and have stable jobs they improve their properties and it encourages their neighbors to improve their properties. The reverse happens all too often as well.
Re:Cheaper beer (Score:4, Insightful)
It does seem to me that a local government should have the welfare of the local community in mind. After all, that is really the purpose of government. If the local government can improve the quality of its services (Linux migration) and at the same time, build skills and direct resources to the local community, then it is a win-win situation.
That is the problem with corporations; they are only concerned with profit and not their workers or communities. They will sell their mother into slavery if it improves their bottom line (and their income).
Re: (Score:3)
Then you end up with a CEO sitting in his mansion wondering why his home town has turned to crap and is now full of stinky homeless people and gang crime. Now if this CEO were willing to relocate to a third world country and impart his brilliant wisdom in all-hands meetings over there, things would be fairer. But if he wants to live in a first world country with first world quality of life then he needs to pay attention to his first world workers (or she as the case may be).
This is the fundamental problem
Re:Cheaper beer (Score:4, Informative)
Yep, higher cost ...
No, lower cost. The higher cost was only short term. In the long term they saved money. Windows is cheaper in the short run because people already know how to use it, and more importantly, already know how to use MS-Office. So you save on training costs. But that is less true today. Where I live, the schools have all switched to Google Docs, so the kids will enter the workforce with little experience with MS-Office, but plenty of experience with tools that can run on any OS with a browser. So in the future, the break even time for switching will be shorter.
Renting (Score:2)
A good analogy is renting vs buying a house.
Your mortgage payment might be a bit more than your rent, but at least you are making an investment rather than just giving your money away...
In the end you have a house as an asset.
Re: (Score:3)
They were faced with a "massive" migration to either WinXP or Linux, on a cost-basis, MS was cheaper - functionality-wise, benefit to the community Linux was superior, and they choose Linux.
I didn't judge the decision, I simply reported what was written in the article. Personally, I think they made an excellent choice by keeping the money local, even if it was greater than the foreign (MS) option.
I discussed their decision, and when they made their decision Linux was the more expensive option and they took
Re: (Score:2)
Just because you keep repeating that, doesn't make it true you know...
The article at the point where it's mentioned that it's most expensive immediately states it is due to the 5 year plan, and sorry, but a migration of win2k -> winxp (where you can keep most apps you were using, and most users will still be fairly familiar, and tech support won't need to learn much new things) vs windows -> linux where just about everything changes just isn't the same order of magnitude.
They also continue to say furt
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
And that was the reason to do it this way.
Same money to local people, not to corps that move profits thru double Irish with a side of Denmark , so they don't pay any local taxes.
Now you understand ?
Re: (Score:2)
More money, but to local people.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course that was then for a XP migration. So they've saved themselves the cost of migrating all over again to Windows8.1u1 as well - in other words, 1 slightly more costly migration costs much less than having to migrate twice over to XP and then Win8 (and possibly then downgrade to win 7 :-)
Don't forget, these guys were early-adopters of commercial Linux, everyone who does that pays more in the early days. If your council did it today, they'd probably find it is cheaper thanks partly to the work the Muni
Re: (Score:2)
What saved money? They went with Linux despite it costing more than the MS alternative - it was buried in the fourth paragraph of the linked-to article.
Rather than send fewer dollars to the US, they spent more dollars and hired local Munich companies to handle the migration.
Money was saved by spending more on the local economy </ECO101>
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Sometimes organizational goals don't match organizational realities.
Did Munich buy 15,000 identical desktops & laptops for all users, and will perform similar massive (government-wide) forklift upgrades going forward, or will new models be brought in over time, creating an ever-changing mix of systems?
My corporate IT background tells me the latter is more likely, but hey, maybe Munich is different.
Re:Cheaper beer (Score:5, Insightful)
yeh, right, just because all those problems never happen in windows!!
and it is really just the reverse of what you said. Linux support better older hardware, when it gives errors, is easier to debug and if you have any problem, is a lot easier to verify the system (file checksum, OS and hardware) remotely and clone and replace the faulty desktop if needed. If it is a HD problem, you can even create a fallback network boot to keep the user working (slower, but working) until someone replaces the HD.
Re: (Score:2)
Support of older hardware is a meaningless metric, will the city of Munich be purposefully running older hardware bought surplus/off-lease, or will they buy current hardware going forward? Systems have a certain useful life, and buying machines mid-way through their useful life, while extremely cost-effective, can result in more frequent hardware swaps/upgrades, increasing labor costs but each iteration will cost less.
Put simply, let's say a given laptop has a five-year useful life, buying a laptop that is
Re:Cheaper beer (Score:5, Insightful)
While there might be valid arguments against their move to Linux, your is definitely not one of them.
Re: (Score:2)
"Windows is the only complete system able to run userland on so many different configurations."
And it's a wonder it's not more unstable with all those possible configurations. Besides, companies tend to have identical or similar models, makes imaging easier...
Re:Cheaper beer (Score:5, Insightful)
You do realize that having stayed in the Windows camp, they would have one migration more, because they're (12 years ago) migration target Windows XP is unsupported.
Re:Cheaper beer (Score:5, Insightful)
They will deeply regret this once a weird error on a critical system pops up in a few years time, and nobody is around to give support.
Yeah, Munich is such a tiny little backwoods place that there's no way they'd ever be able to find someone who knows anything about Linux.
Re:Well, here is the problem: (Score:4, Interesting)
They could have saved a lot of money just by threatening plausibly to switch to GNU/Linux.
Microsoft is known to be very forthcoming when people start considering alternatives. "We'll give you the Ballmers and Chains for free. You'll just pay for the thumbscrews later on. And you'll get a sweet deal for rack-mounted whatevers to boot."
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, why would MS try and retain clients? They'll just let cities drift off into "roll your own" land and watch their business revenue shrink...
Re: (Score:2)
Bavaria doesn't count as Germany?