Amount of copium is insane in comments. Like, people straight up using fate, like it’s a fockin religion, instead of using their head.
Other countries also tried and failed. It’s never brings any profit, instead government usually end up losing shit ton of money. Reason is simple: adoption requires contribution. You need to hire new IT specialist, that knows linux and not windows. You need to do requalification of already existing specialist. You need to adapt software. You need to teach every single focking person how to work with new alternative software. And you need to suffer downtime, cause people still new to linux and it’s software.
Adoption is very hard and those miserable savings on windows licensing is nothing compared to cost of migration. I’m not even saying “hypothetically”, here documented list.
This is such a shortsighted take. After the initial hurdle of migration, you’re free of licenses forever. It won’t take long for the savings to match the initial costs, and after that it’s more money in the bank until the Sun explodes.
Not to mention the tiny insignificant issue of a foreign private company having backdoors into your government’s IT infrastructure. A foreign private company headquartered in Trumpistan of all places.
I worked for “business automation” company, mainly as tech support of SAAS solution that target accountants\clerks that works with government documents.
I feel sorry for support guys\system administrators and everyone else involved.
No no, I know what you’re implying, I was implying that the link doesn’t prove what you think it does. I’m assuming you fixated on the Munich project, and that is a convoluted story and the Wikipedia entry on that is not up to date. The latest on the Munich project is that they cancelled the switch back to Windows.
Edit: And I can only assume that you were referring to the Munich story because you threw up the link with zero quotations or direct references. If you have a specific interpretation of that Wikipedia article, then you need cite things. What exactly is the “cost of migration”? Is it one million dollars or 50 million? Did it take a weekend to do, or did it bog down entire departments for months at a time? Is that 50 million dollars over budget? How are the immediate costs vs long term savings measured? Because the savings are measured in decades, not single year or several year licensing costs.
I’m not going to do your job for you. You might think that a months or even years long transition progress is unacceptable, but someone like myself who works in IT would see that is within expectations. If you have a point to make, then MAKE IT.
Amount of copium is insane in comments. Like, people straight up using fate, like it’s a fockin religion, instead of using their head.
Other countries also tried and failed. It’s never brings any profit, instead government usually end up losing shit ton of money. Reason is simple: adoption requires contribution. You need to hire new IT specialist, that knows linux and not windows. You need to do requalification of already existing specialist. You need to adapt software. You need to teach every single focking person how to work with new alternative software. And you need to suffer downtime, cause people still new to linux and it’s software.
Adoption is very hard and those miserable savings on windows licensing is nothing compared to cost of migration. I’m not even saying “hypothetically”, here documented list.
Blind coping will get you nowhere.
This is such a shortsighted take. After the initial hurdle of migration, you’re free of licenses forever. It won’t take long for the savings to match the initial costs, and after that it’s more money in the bank until the Sun explodes.
Not to mention the tiny insignificant issue of a foreign private company having backdoors into your government’s IT infrastructure. A foreign private company headquartered in Trumpistan of all places.
I can only imagine all these bureaucrats with learning issues because something needs to be done differently now🙄
I worked for “business automation” company, mainly as tech support of SAAS solution that target accountants\clerks that works with government documents.
I feel sorry for support guys\system administrators and everyone else involved.
Except for the clerks I guess… I wouldn’t feel sorry for them.
What exactly are you trying to prove with that Wikipedia link? If anything it shows relatively wide adoption of Linux.
Reread my comment then from the start.
No no, I know what you’re implying, I was implying that the link doesn’t prove what you think it does. I’m assuming you fixated on the Munich project, and that is a convoluted story and the Wikipedia entry on that is not up to date. The latest on the Munich project is that they cancelled the switch back to Windows.
Edit: And I can only assume that you were referring to the Munich story because you threw up the link with zero quotations or direct references. If you have a specific interpretation of that Wikipedia article, then you need cite things. What exactly is the “cost of migration”? Is it one million dollars or 50 million? Did it take a weekend to do, or did it bog down entire departments for months at a time? Is that 50 million dollars over budget? How are the immediate costs vs long term savings measured? Because the savings are measured in decades, not single year or several year licensing costs.
I’m not going to do your job for you. You might think that a months or even years long transition progress is unacceptable, but someone like myself who works in IT would see that is within expectations. If you have a point to make, then MAKE IT.