• Zerush@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    3 years ago

    Some years ago a lot of Spanish administrations and companies have done the same, saving a lot of money as the main reason.

  • brombek@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 years ago

    The next day M$ will erect their campus building… year later back to M$ products…

    • joojmachine@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      3 years ago

      this time it at least looks like its focusing on the open-ness of open source instead of just the free-of-cost nature of it, and after seeing other parts of the german government switching to more open platforms (like parts of their health and military comms switching to matrix), we can at least be cautiously optimistic

      • brombek@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        3 years ago

        I hope so too. This is super important for states to be lock-in free and open source as much as possible. And we need a good example for other countries to follow.

  • 3arn0wl@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    3 years ago

    It’ll be interesting to see if Micro$oft try to inveigle their way in again like they did in Milan, and to see if they’re successful.

  • 2xsaiko@lemmy.ml
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    3 years ago

    I hope this time they will actually stick with it *looks at Munich with their LiMux*

    • Jedrax@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      3 years ago

      If kids are taught in schools that it’s okay to not just use one single type of word processor that’s proprietary, that’s a great thing!

      • 3arn0wl@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        3 years ago

        I think it’ll be more significant than that : people like to use the tools they’re used to… If they’ve grown up using open source software, then that will be their norm. They will also realise that there’s really no reason to pay for proprietary systems and apps. And that’s a huge blow to Micro$oft, Adobe, et al.

    • joojmachine@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 years ago

      lol I was sure someone would have already posted here, even took some time to search before sharing here

  • poVoq@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    3 years ago

    I hope they don’t try to roll their own distribution like LiMux did.

    • Helix 🧬@feddit.deB
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 years ago

      Yeah, they should just buy a supported distribution. I bet they can get a pretty good deal on UCS or SuSE.

  • juh@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    3 years ago

    Every IT project of German authorities failed in the last two decades. So this is a bad news because the project will fail too and they will say it was because Open Source does not work.

    • 3arn0wl@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      3 years ago

      Jan Philipp Albrecht notes of the Munich failure: “The main problem there was that the employees weren’t taken along enough. We do better. We are planning long transition phases with parallel use, and we’re introducing open source step-by-step when the departments are ready. With this, we also create the reason for further introduction, because people can see that it works.”

      https://fossforce.com/2021/11/a-german-state-is-saying-goodbye-windows-hello-linux/

      It will depend on people wanting to use it, but, imo, governments and government agencies ought to be using, and suggesting that others use, open technologies.

      • sibachian@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        3 years ago

        i infuriates me how microsoft is stealing tax money and has held a global monopoly for decades. especially when there are free alternatives. it isn’t even legal for a foreign private company to hold monopoly and extract tax wealth. most other software they use follow these rules, so why not windows/office?

        • 3arn0wl@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          3 years ago

          It infuriates me too.

          I really don’t understand how it’s acceptable for shops to sell devices pre-loaded with Micro$oft products, without letting the consumer know that there’s the license fee included in the purchase. But, as you say, this practice has gone on for decades.

          • sibachian@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            3 years ago

            that too, that just further adds to the issue. hell, industry standards like adobe literally only exist because they didn’t pursue pirates (profit came from business license) and the adobe suite was the only tools people knew at the time due to being available for “free” to home users. a statement which the CEO admitted, but then had to redact.

        • sexy_peach@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 years ago

          Imagine the software that could have been written with the money that microsoft sucked up into their shitty OS

          • sibachian@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            3 years ago

            and contribute to society/the world while doing it.

            so many opportunities has been lost because of capitalism. it’s not like private companies ever take risks either, they use the freely available research and development we paid for with our taxes and then sell it back to us as a product.

            nope. open source everything. it’s the only way to save the planet.

      • juh@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 years ago

        The main problem there was that the employees weren’t taken along enough.

        Somewhere I heard that the project was suffocated by bureaucracy, whether intentionally or not I don’t know. But I can imagine that the lobbying of Microsoft supported bureaucratic behaviour. I wish them all the best, but the history of governmental IT projects is a story of failure.