you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 10 points 13 hours ago (1 child)

You're not wrong exactly, but I think you're perhaps assuming an unnecessarily absolutist approach. If there are legacy systems that need windows, keep windows for those legacy systems. What you're describing are exceptions, not the norm. The vast, vast majority of public service computers could just as easily be running Linux.

As for who the Federal government sues, that's why you go with an enterprise release like Red Had or Ubuntu. You find a company that you're happy to work with, you pay them maybe 25% of what you're paying MS right now, and in return you get a full support plan with clearly defined SLAs.

This isn't so much "Nothing's impossible" as it is "It's really not that hard." These are solved problems. Plenty of governments have already switched over to open source.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 11 hours ago*

    Fair critique!

    A less all-or-nothing approach could be to migrate Members of Parliament and departmental executive down to management… maybe even support staff. That group makes decisions based on the products from operational folks. So they can deal with a basic office suite. There’s a big savings there.

    At the operational level, things would get expensive because of the specialized and in-house software for which there are no alternatives except Windows.

    I don’t know enough about IT to comment on the feasibility of supporting that scenario.

    I didn’t catch this in the content posted by OP, but I thought it would be interesting to mention: GCTools. It’s a suite of collaboration and document management tools. I think they’re all open source. ^But ^I ^don’t ^know ^anyone ^who ^uses ^them.

    Edit: Can’t superscript. Fuck it

  • source
  • parent