Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 27th Nov 2006 10:55 UTC, submitted by Jean Claude
Linux French députés' offices will be equipped with a Linux operating system and open source productivity software. There will be 1154 French parliamentary workstations running on an open source OS, with OpenOffice.org, Firefox and an open source email client.
Thread beginning with comment 185970
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: Nice...
by NotParker on Tue 28th Nov 2006 04:44 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Nice..."
NotParker
Member since:
2006-06-01

Maybe. But then based on the fact that Windows is only required on 20% of the desktops, this implies that Windows and a Windows-based software stack are possibly being used unnecessarily on the remaining 11,200 desktops.

I think the lessons are simple.

There are no open source replacement for Windows power users.

If you want to spend 50% more than Windows, you could replace Windows for purely ideological and parochial reasons (SUSE is from Munich).

If you want to spend a fortune on training you can throw away a perfectly good desktop infrastructure and replace with something that someday may work as well as the one you have now (which is Windows NT actually).

Linux - capable of sort of duplicating Windows NT.

Not a great endorsement.

In practice the migration will be an expensive disaster that will be cancelled within a year or so before 10 - 20% of the desktops are replaced.

But the costs Munich are carrying amounts effectively to a one-time investment.

That is false. Support costs for Linux are high.

Most of the Microsoft software can be used for 5 - 7 years (the same way Windows NT has lasted Munich for 7 - 9 years).

The Microsoft software licenses themselves are considerably cheaper than the 12 million lost to the Linux project.

It will be something like 21-28 years (if Linux support and upgrade costs were magically zero) to recoup that 12 million.

And Linux costs will not magically become zero.

"Will Linux ever be a major player on the desktop? Andy McCue hears from IT chiefs - who, for the most part, answered with a resounding 'no'.

...

Gavin Whatrup, group IT director at Creston, said: "There has to be a compelling reason to fix something that isn't broken. Whilst Windows on the desktop has its faults it is stable, useable, manageable and cash costs are low. I don't see Linux replacing Windows on the office desktop unless it can challenge those issues and offer something Windows can't.""

http://www.silicon.com/ciojury/0,3800003161,39163944,00.htm

One final item:

The Munich Linux project's cost has already jumped from 30 million Euros to 35 million Euros.

Another 5 million down the drain for zero improvements over Windows NT 4.0

Edited 2006-11-28 04:57

Reply Parent Score: -3

RE[6]: Nice...
by Xaero_Vincent on Tue 28th Nov 2006 05:12 in reply to "RE[5]: Nice..."
Xaero_Vincent Member since:
2006-08-18

----
Linux - capable of sort of duplicating Windows NT.
----

What you really meant was this:

Windows Longhorn Server + PowerShell * $1000+ = capable of sort of duplicating SUSE, Fedora, or RedHat/CentOS GNU/Linux.

Reply Parent Score: 2

v RE[7]: Nice...
by NotParker on Tue 28th Nov 2006 05:44 in reply to "RE[6]: Nice..."
RE[6]: Nice...
by Kokopelli on Tue 28th Nov 2006 05:38 in reply to "RE[5]: Nice..."
Kokopelli Member since:
2005-07-06

NotParker, what do you do for a living? I still disagree with you an many points but you seem to have a inexhaustible amount of information at your disposal. I honestly do not care enough about any of this to have researched Munich enough to provide the myriad of crud you have.

You seem to think it a foregone conclusion Munich will fail. I sincerely hope you are wrong, I am not aware of any successful large scale roll outs of Linux to the desktop to date. The Munich project seems well thought out from a deployment standpoint with maintenance taken into account. Time will tell I guess.

On a side note, why does everyone use Photoshop as the example of a program that does not run on Linux? I agree Gimp is not a substitute for Photoshop, but I think there are viable alternatives on Linux for non graphics designers. Really, what percentage of your average desktop user uses Photoshop? Word, Outlook (in businesses), Excel too, but Photoshop?

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[7]: Nice...
by archiesteel on Tue 28th Nov 2006 05:42 in reply to "RE[6]: Nice..."
archiesteel Member since:
2005-07-02

NotParker is probably a MS astroturfer. I hope he is, for his own sake.

NotParker, MS is a virtual monopoly. Jackson's ruling might have been overturned, but that doesn't mean that MS is not a monopoly.

It's funny how on one hand you say that Linux' market share is less than 1% (for which you have no real proof outside dubious net statistics), while on the other hand you argue that MS is not a monopoly. Hint: when you have more than 90% of a market, you *are* a monopoly in the common sense of the word.

Contradicting yourself in such a blantant is another reason why you're a troll.

Edited 2006-11-28 05:44

Reply Parent Score: 3