MS Windows the cheaper option: City Council pulled the plug on its £535,000 Linux open-source pilot

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Max Burke, Nov 17, 2006.

  1. Max Burke

    Max Burke Guest

    Criticism is mounting over the termination of a large-scale Linux project in
    Birmingham.
    As reported earlier this week, Birmingham City Council pulled the plug on
    its £535,000 open-source pilot after its analysis concluded that it was
    cheaper to upgrade to a Microsoft-based platform than proceed with open
    source.

    The council planned to roll out Linux software and applications on 1,500
    desktops in libraries across the city, but in the end it got no further than
    a 200-desktop project. Several industry watchers have voiced their concerns
    about the project, particularly around the number of PCs rolled out.
    Birmingham's expenditure averaged over £2,500 per PC.

    Microsoft's head of platform strategy, Nick McGrath, would not be drawn on
    the specifics of the Birmingham project, but he said: "I would always
    recommend that the customer took solid analysis, whether it is for
    commercial or non-commercial software. But with Linux and open-source
    software, free is just not the case. There is support and there is
    maintenance, in the same way as there is with Microsoft."

    McGrath added that there were significantly more IT professionals with the
    skills to support Windows systems, compared with open-source alternatives.
    "The skills required to own and manage open-source technology are more
    challenging," he said.

    http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/0,1000000121,39284758,00.htm
    --

    Replace the obvious with paradise.net to email me
    Found Images
    http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/~mlvburke
     
    Max Burke, Nov 17, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Max Burke

    Who Am I Guest

    In article <>, "Max Burke" <>
    wrote:

    > Criticism is mounting over the termination of a large-scale Linux project in
    > Birmingham.
    > As reported earlier this week, Birmingham City Council pulled the plug on
    > its £535,000 open-source pilot after its analysis concluded that it was
    > cheaper to upgrade to a Microsoft-based platform than proceed with open
    > source.


    £535,000 over 1500 machines comes to £356.66, or in NZ dollars $1016.



    >
    > The council planned to roll out Linux software and applications on 1,500
    > desktops in libraries across the city, but in the end it got no further than
    > a 200-desktop project. Several industry watchers have voiced their concerns
    > about the project, particularly around the number of PCs rolled out.
    > Birmingham's expenditure averaged over £2,500 per PC.


    That is NZ$7100+, love to see how they worked that one out.
     
    Who Am I, Nov 20, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Max Burke

    Chris Hope Guest

    Who Am I wrote:

    > In article <>, "Max Burke"
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >> Criticism is mounting over the termination of a large-scale Linux
    >> project in Birmingham.
    >> As reported earlier this week, Birmingham City Council pulled the
    >> plug on its £535,000 open-source pilot after its analysis concluded
    >> that it was cheaper to upgrade to a Microsoft-based platform than
    >> proceed with open source.

    >
    > £535,000 over 1500 machines comes to £356.66, or in NZ dollars $1016.
    >>
    >> The council planned to roll out Linux software and applications on
    >> 1,500 desktops in libraries across the city, but in the end it got no
    >> further than a 200-desktop project. Several industry watchers have
    >> voiced their concerns about the project, particularly around the
    >> number of PCs rolled out. Birmingham's expenditure averaged over
    >> £2,500 per PC.

    >
    > That is NZ$7100+, love to see how they worked that one out.


    It looks like they divided the total amount by the 200 they did
    install -> "it got no further than a 200-desktop project".

    What confuses me though, if all they were doing was installing open
    source equivalents of MS software, then surely it should cost no more
    in man hours to install this than it would be to upgrade all those
    machines to the more recent versions of MS software, assuming they had
    to install the software on a machine by machine basis.

    --
    Chris Hope | www.electrictoolbox.com | www.linuxcdmall.com
     
    Chris Hope, Nov 20, 2006
    #3
  4. Max Burke

    impossible Guest

    "Who Am I" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In article <>, "Max Burke"
    > <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >> Criticism is mounting over the termination of a large-scale Linux
    >> project in
    >> Birmingham.
    >> As reported earlier this week, Birmingham City Council pulled the
    >> plug on
    >> its £535,000 open-source pilot after its analysis concluded that it
    >> was
    >> cheaper to upgrade to a Microsoft-based platform than proceed with
    >> open
    >> source.

    >
    > £535,000 over 1500 machines comes to £356.66, or in NZ dollars
    > $1016.
    >
    >
    >
    >>
    >> The council planned to roll out Linux software and applications on
    >> 1,500
    >> desktops in libraries across the city, but in the end it got no
    >> further than
    >> a 200-desktop project. Several industry watchers have voiced their
    >> concerns
    >> about the project, particularly around the number of PCs rolled
    >> out.
    >> Birmingham's expenditure averaged over £2,500 per PC.

    >
    > That is NZ$7100+, love to see how they worked that one out.


    The actual number of pcs rolled out was just 200 instead of the
    budgeted 1500. So 535,000 divided by 200 = 2675, or about NZ$7600.
    Nice work if you can get it.
     
    impossible, Nov 20, 2006
    #4
  5. Max Burke

    Who Am I Guest

    In article <>,
    Chris Hope <> wrote:

    > Who Am I wrote:
    >
    > > In article <>, "Max Burke"
    > > <> wrote:
    > >
    > >> Criticism is mounting over the termination of a large-scale Linux
    > >> project in Birmingham.
    > >> As reported earlier this week, Birmingham City Council pulled the
    > >> plug on its £535,000 open-source pilot after its analysis concluded
    > >> that it was cheaper to upgrade to a Microsoft-based platform than
    > >> proceed with open source.

    > >
    > > £535,000 over 1500 machines comes to £356.66, or in NZ dollars $1016.
    > >>
    > >> The council planned to roll out Linux software and applications on
    > >> 1,500 desktops in libraries across the city, but in the end it got no
    > >> further than a 200-desktop project. Several industry watchers have
    > >> voiced their concerns about the project, particularly around the
    > >> number of PCs rolled out. Birmingham's expenditure averaged over
    > >> £2,500 per PC.

    > >
    > > That is NZ$7100+, love to see how they worked that one out.

    >
    > It looks like they divided the total amount by the 200 they did
    > install -> "it got no further than a 200-desktop project".
    >
    > What confuses me though, if all they were doing was installing open
    > source equivalents of MS software, then surely it should cost no more
    > in man hours to install this than it would be to upgrade all those
    > machines to the more recent versions of MS software, assuming they had
    > to install the software on a machine by machine basis.


    Linux to me is only useful if you neglect to account for your time.
    I have a Mac and run Parallels on it. Setting up XP on it was dead easy
    and I am no windows person by a long shot, however trying to get linux
    to work was a nightmare and I ended up giving up (Ubuntu, Suse).

    What I thought I would do is get the free linux version of RealBasic to
    play with rather than get the education version for Mac OSX at $105.
    However, by the time I take into account my time I have easily wasted
    the $105 in my time already, it would have been cheaper for me to buy a
    product that simply works.

    And there lies the crux of the matter, it is cheaper time wise to use XP
    on these machine as that is also what their customers are used to,
    therefore there are zero retraining costs associated with it.
     
    Who Am I, Nov 20, 2006
    #5
  6. Max Burke

    Earl Grey Guest

    impossible wrote:
    > "Who Am I" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> In article <>, "Max Burke"
    >> <>
    >> wrote:
    >>
    >>> Criticism is mounting over the termination of a large-scale Linux
    >>> project in
    >>> Birmingham.
    >>> As reported earlier this week, Birmingham City Council pulled the
    >>> plug on
    >>> its £535,000 open-source pilot after its analysis concluded that it
    >>> was
    >>> cheaper to upgrade to a Microsoft-based platform than proceed with
    >>> open
    >>> source.

    >> £535,000 over 1500 machines comes to £356.66, or in NZ dollars
    >> $1016.
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>> The council planned to roll out Linux software and applications on
    >>> 1,500
    >>> desktops in libraries across the city, but in the end it got no
    >>> further than
    >>> a 200-desktop project. Several industry watchers have voiced their
    >>> concerns
    >>> about the project, particularly around the number of PCs rolled
    >>> out.
    >>> Birmingham's expenditure averaged over £2,500 per PC.

    >> That is NZ$7100+, love to see how they worked that one out.

    >
    > The actual number of pcs rolled out was just 200 instead of the
    > budgeted 1500. So 535,000 divided by 200 = 2675, or about NZ$7600.
    > Nice work if you can get it.
    >
    >




    Here's a story with a bit more detail
    http://society.guardian.co.uk/e-public/story/0,,1786068,00.html

    OpenForum Europe and the Institute for IT Training, two of the partners
    in the Open Source Academy project, have started Certified Open, a
    scheme to collect information on what operating systems and application
    software are required by specialist local government software. Graham
    Taylor, director of OpenForum Europe, says that buying specialist
    software can lead councils to suffer "hidden lock-in".

    This hit Birmingham city council's attempt to move 134 library staff to
    a full set of open source software, including SuSE's Linux operating
    system, OpenOffice 2.0 and web-browser Firefox. The city's library
    management software, Galaxy, works only on Microsoft Windows. DS, the
    supplier, was prepared to produce a Linux version, but this would have
    taken too long and cost too much for the trial.

    Les Timms, IT manager at the city's IT provider, Service Birmingham,
    says niche suppliers understandably focus on their area of expertise
    rather than on providing software for multiple operating systems. Staff
    have stayed with Microsoft Windows XP, although they have moved fairly
    smoothly to OpenOffice 2.0.

    The city also had mixed results with public access computers: after
    trials in three libraries, it is making 130 all open source, although 66
    used for education will use Windows and OpenOffice 2.0.
     
    Earl Grey, Nov 20, 2006
    #6
  7. Max Burke

    Chris Hope Guest

    Who Am I wrote:

    > In article <>,
    > Chris Hope <> wrote:
    >
    >> Who Am I wrote:
    >>
    >> > In article <>, "Max Burke"
    >> > <> wrote:
    >> >
    >> >> Criticism is mounting over the termination of a large-scale Linux
    >> >> project in Birmingham.
    >> >> As reported earlier this week, Birmingham City Council pulled the
    >> >> plug on its £535,000 open-source pilot after its analysis
    >> >> concluded that it was cheaper to upgrade to a Microsoft-based
    >> >> platform than proceed with open source.
    >> >
    >> > £535,000 over 1500 machines comes to £356.66, or in NZ dollars
    >> > $1016.
    >> >>
    >> >> The council planned to roll out Linux software and applications on
    >> >> 1,500 desktops in libraries across the city, but in the end it got
    >> >> no further than a 200-desktop project. Several industry watchers
    >> >> have voiced their concerns about the project, particularly around
    >> >> the number of PCs rolled out. Birmingham's expenditure averaged
    >> >> over £2,500 per PC.
    >> >
    >> > That is NZ$7100+, love to see how they worked that one out.

    >>
    >> It looks like they divided the total amount by the 200 they did
    >> install -> "it got no further than a 200-desktop project".
    >>
    >> What confuses me though, if all they were doing was installing open
    >> source equivalents of MS software, then surely it should cost no more
    >> in man hours to install this than it would be to upgrade all those
    >> machines to the more recent versions of MS software, assuming they
    >> had to install the software on a machine by machine basis.

    >
    > Linux to me is only useful if you neglect to account for your time.
    > I have a Mac and run Parallels on it. Setting up XP on it was dead
    > easy and I am no windows person by a long shot, however trying to get
    > linux to work was a nightmare and I ended up giving up (Ubuntu, Suse)..
    >
    > What I thought I would do is get the free linux version of RealBasic
    > to play with rather than get the education version for Mac OSX at
    > $105. However, by the time I take into account my time I have easily
    > wasted the $105 in my time already, it would have been cheaper for me
    > to buy a product that simply works.
    >
    > And there lies the crux of the matter, it is cheaper time wise to use
    > XP on these machine as that is also what their customers are used to,
    > therefore there are zero retraining costs associated with it.


    Fair comments. Of course, it all depends what you're used to using.

    For me, it would be faster to install a desktop using Linux than
    Windows, simply because a) I know what I'm doing when it comes to Linux
    and b) it installs almost all the software I need in the 30 minutes or
    so it takes to run the installer. After installing XP I still need to
    install all the software I need, like an office suite etc. In both
    cases I'm going to mess around after the install getting the desktop
    working the way I want it.

    For other people, moving from Windows to Linux, or Windows to Mac or
    whatever else, is more difficult because they don't know where to find
    everything and the way the GUI works is a little different between each
    OS. Also it can be trickier getting some hardware to work on different
    operating systems. For a lot of people it's more or less impossible to
    even think about installing an OS... fortunately for them, PCs come
    preinstalled :) and unfortunately for some of us they have children who
    end up having to support them ;p

    I still believe Linux has a long way to go but it's getting there as
    more hardware vendors start making drivers etc for Linux.

    --
    Chris Hope | www.electrictoolbox.com | www.linuxcdmall.com
     
    Chris Hope, Nov 20, 2006
    #7
  8. Max Burke

    impossible Guest

    "Earl Grey" <> wrote in message
    news:45611950$...
    > impossible wrote:
    >>
    >> The actual number of pcs rolled out was just 200 instead of the
    >> budgeted 1500. So 535,000 divided by 200 = 2675, or about NZ$7600.
    >> Nice work if you can get it.

    > Here's a story with a bit more detail
    > http://society.guardian.co.uk/e-public/story/0,,1786068,00.html
    >

    <SNIP>
    >
    > This hit Birmingham city council's attempt to move 134 library staff
    > to a full set of open source software, including SuSE's Linux
    > operating system, OpenOffice 2.0 and web-browser Firefox. The city's
    > library management software, Galaxy, works only on Microsoft
    > Windows. DS, the supplier, was prepared to produce a Linux version,
    > but this would have taken too long and cost too much for the
    > trial....


    Doesn't sound like the same project. Or is it? 1500 desktops, 134
    desktops -- that's quite a difference. If the 134 figure is right,
    then the projected costs were high to begin with. Are you saying then
    that the project was canned because they couldn't get a Linux version
    of a key application written? And that no one one looked into that
    *before* the trial began?
     
    impossible, Nov 20, 2006
    #8
  9. Max Burke

    Earl Grey Guest

    impossible wrote:
    > "Earl Grey" <> wrote in message
    > news:45611950$...
    >> impossible wrote:
    >>> The actual number of pcs rolled out was just 200 instead of the
    >>> budgeted 1500. So 535,000 divided by 200 = 2675, or about NZ$7600.
    >>> Nice work if you can get it.

    >> Here's a story with a bit more detail
    >> http://society.guardian.co.uk/e-public/story/0,,1786068,00.html
    >>

    > <SNIP>
    >> This hit Birmingham city council's attempt to move 134 library staff
    >> to a full set of open source software, including SuSE's Linux
    >> operating system, OpenOffice 2.0 and web-browser Firefox. The city's
    >> library management software, Galaxy, works only on Microsoft
    >> Windows. DS, the supplier, was prepared to produce a Linux version,
    >> but this would have taken too long and cost too much for the
    >> trial....

    >
    > Doesn't sound like the same project. Or is it? 1500 desktops, 134
    > desktops -- that's quite a difference. If the 134 figure is right,
    > then the projected costs were high to begin with. Are you saying then
    > that the project was canned because they couldn't get a Linux version
    > of a key application written? And that no one one looked into that
    > *before* the trial began?
    >
    >


    They must be talking about another Birmingham City Council Library then.
    People pull figures out of their arse when they try justify fuckups and
    U-turns.
    Perhaps we don't know enough about it to offer any informed comment.
    I assume that the city of Birmingham would have more than 1500 desktops,
    considering that the Munich project was for 16000.
    Birmingham is a big city.
    The 1500 may just be for libraries, they have forty of them.
    134 might just be a single trial, $535k might be the total cost, the
    system looks like it runs on Unix with Windows clients and they weren't
    going to build a Linux client for a trial.
    Who knows ?
     
    Earl Grey, Nov 20, 2006
    #9
  10. Max Burke

    impossible Guest

    "Earl Grey" <> wrote in message
    news:456134eb$...
    > impossible wrote:
    >> "Earl Grey" <> wrote in message
    >> news:45611950$...
    >>> impossible wrote:
    >>>> The actual number of pcs rolled out was just 200 instead of the
    >>>> budgeted 1500. So 535,000 divided by 200 = 2675, or about
    >>>> NZ$7600. Nice work if you can get it.
    >>> Here's a story with a bit more detail
    >>> http://society.guardian.co.uk/e-public/story/0,,1786068,00.html
    >>>

    >> <SNIP>
    >>> This hit Birmingham city council's attempt to move 134 library
    >>> staff to a full set of open source software, including SuSE's
    >>> Linux operating system, OpenOffice 2.0 and web-browser Firefox.
    >>> The city's library management software, Galaxy, works only on
    >>> Microsoft Windows. DS, the supplier, was prepared to produce a
    >>> Linux version, but this would have taken too long and cost too
    >>> much for the trial....

    >>
    >> Doesn't sound like the same project. Or is it? 1500 desktops, 134
    >> desktops -- that's quite a difference. If the 134 figure is right,
    >> then the projected costs were high to begin with. Are you saying
    >> then that the project was canned because they couldn't get a Linux
    >> version of a key application written? And that no one one looked
    >> into that *before* the trial began?

    >
    > They must be talking about another Birmingham City Council Library
    > then.
    > People pull figures out of their arse when they try justify fuckups
    > and U-turns.
    > Perhaps we don't know enough about it to offer any informed comment.
    > I assume that the city of Birmingham would have more than 1500
    > desktops, considering that the Munich project was for 16000.
    > Birmingham is a big city.
    > The 1500 may just be for libraries, they have forty of them.
    > 134 might just be a single trial, $535k might be the total cost, the
    > system looks like it runs on Unix with Windows clients and they
    > weren't going to build a Linux client for a trial.
    > Who knows ?


    Yes. Have a look here:

    http://www.opensourceacademy.org.uk/solutions/casestudies/birminham-city-council/file

    My impression is that the 535k was the amount budgeted just for the
    134-destop trial. Another 1m+ was projected over 5 years to complete
    the upgrade across all libraries, which is the part that was killed.
     
    impossible, Nov 20, 2006
    #10
  11. Max Burke

    Earl Grey Guest

    impossible wrote:
    > "Earl Grey" <> wrote in message
    > news:456134eb$...
    >> impossible wrote:
    >>> "Earl Grey" <> wrote in message
    >>> news:45611950$...
    >>>> impossible wrote:
    >>>>> The actual number of pcs rolled out was just 200 instead of the
    >>>>> budgeted 1500. So 535,000 divided by 200 = 2675, or about
    >>>>> NZ$7600. Nice work if you can get it.
    >>>> Here's a story with a bit more detail
    >>>> http://society.guardian.co.uk/e-public/story/0,,1786068,00.html
    >>>>
    >>> <SNIP>
    >>>> This hit Birmingham city council's attempt to move 134 library
    >>>> staff to a full set of open source software, including SuSE's
    >>>> Linux operating system, OpenOffice 2.0 and web-browser Firefox.
    >>>> The city's library management software, Galaxy, works only on
    >>>> Microsoft Windows. DS, the supplier, was prepared to produce a
    >>>> Linux version, but this would have taken too long and cost too
    >>>> much for the trial....
    >>> Doesn't sound like the same project. Or is it? 1500 desktops, 134
    >>> desktops -- that's quite a difference. If the 134 figure is right,
    >>> then the projected costs were high to begin with. Are you saying
    >>> then that the project was canned because they couldn't get a Linux
    >>> version of a key application written? And that no one one looked
    >>> into that *before* the trial began?

    >> They must be talking about another Birmingham City Council Library
    >> then.
    >> People pull figures out of their arse when they try justify fuckups
    >> and U-turns.
    >> Perhaps we don't know enough about it to offer any informed comment.
    >> I assume that the city of Birmingham would have more than 1500
    >> desktops, considering that the Munich project was for 16000.
    >> Birmingham is a big city.
    >> The 1500 may just be for libraries, they have forty of them.
    >> 134 might just be a single trial, $535k might be the total cost, the
    >> system looks like it runs on Unix with Windows clients and they
    >> weren't going to build a Linux client for a trial.
    >> Who knows ?

    >
    > Yes. Have a look here:
    >
    > http://www.opensourceacademy.org.uk/solutions/casestudies/birminham-city-council/file
    >
    > My impression is that the 535k was the amount budgeted just for the
    > 134-destop trial. Another 1m+ was projected over 5 years to complete
    > the upgrade across all libraries, which is the part that was killed.
    >
    >

    They give a budget there for 330 PCs for hardware and infrastucture of
    for 534k which includes 220k for their team costs
    They give a cost for their Windows upgrade for 479k where the team costs
    are 95k
    You can have a go at your per desktop sum again, but there is also
    capital included that they have previously invested in Windows skills.
     
    Earl Grey, Nov 20, 2006
    #11
  12. Max Burke

    impossible Guest

    "Earl Grey" <> wrote in message
    news:4561fac0$...
    > impossible wrote:
    >> "Earl Grey" <> wrote in message
    >> news:456134eb$...
    >>> impossible wrote:
    >>>> "Earl Grey" <> wrote in message
    >>>> news:45611950$...
    >>>>> impossible wrote:
    >>>>>> The actual number of pcs rolled out was just 200 instead of the
    >>>>>> budgeted 1500. So 535,000 divided by 200 = 2675, or about
    >>>>>> NZ$7600. Nice work if you can get it.
    >>>>> Here's a story with a bit more detail
    >>>>> http://society.guardian.co.uk/e-public/story/0,,1786068,00.html
    >>>>>
    >>>> <SNIP>
    >>>>> This hit Birmingham city council's attempt to move 134 library
    >>>>> staff to a full set of open source software, including SuSE's
    >>>>> Linux operating system, OpenOffice 2.0 and web-browser Firefox.
    >>>>> The city's library management software, Galaxy, works only on
    >>>>> Microsoft Windows. DS, the supplier, was prepared to produce a
    >>>>> Linux version, but this would have taken too long and cost too
    >>>>> much for the trial....
    >>>> Doesn't sound like the same project. Or is it? 1500 desktops, 134
    >>>> desktops -- that's quite a difference. If the 134 figure is
    >>>> right, then the projected costs were high to begin with. Are you
    >>>> saying then that the project was canned because they couldn't get
    >>>> a Linux version of a key application written? And that no one one
    >>>> looked into that *before* the trial began?
    >>> They must be talking about another Birmingham City Council Library
    >>> then.
    >>> People pull figures out of their arse when they try justify
    >>> fuckups and U-turns.
    >>> Perhaps we don't know enough about it to offer any informed
    >>> comment.
    >>> I assume that the city of Birmingham would have more than 1500
    >>> desktops, considering that the Munich project was for 16000.
    >>> Birmingham is a big city.
    >>> The 1500 may just be for libraries, they have forty of them.
    >>> 134 might just be a single trial, $535k might be the total cost,
    >>> the system looks like it runs on Unix with Windows clients and
    >>> they weren't going to build a Linux client for a trial.
    >>> Who knows ?

    >>
    >> Yes. Have a look here:
    >>
    >> http://www.opensourceacademy.org.uk/solutions/casestudies/birminham-city-council/file
    >>
    >> My impression is that the 535k was the amount budgeted just for the
    >> 134-destop trial. Another 1m+ was projected over 5 years to
    >> complete the upgrade across all libraries, which is the part that
    >> was killed.

    > They give a budget there for 330 PCs for hardware and infrastucture
    > of for 534k which includes 220k for their team costs
    > They give a cost for their Windows upgrade for 479k where the team
    > costs are 95k
    > You can have a go at your per desktop sum again, but there is also
    > capital included that they have previously invested in Windows
    > skills.
    >
    >

    Agreed. The per-desktop budget for deploying either Windows or Linux
    was about the same, and there's no apparent issue here of cost
    over-runs. But apparently no one had really thought through the full
    implications of doing a conversion. Platform independence is all well
    and good as a goal, but either the software that will allow you to
    achieve this actually exists or it doesn't. If your key desktop
    applications are all Windows-based and proprietary, then you need to
    replace them, and apparently Birmingham found the costs of doing
    *that* prohibitive.
     
    impossible, Nov 20, 2006
    #12
  13. In message <>, Who Am I
    wrote:

    > Linux to me is only useful if you neglect to account for your time.


    The idea that staying with Dimdows and Microsoft Office means no time cost
    is a myth. Look at this item
    <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6165124.stm> about the prospects for
    users upgrading to Office 2007--there're going to be major retraining costs
    and time involved. Also note that OpenOffice has already got 10% of the
    total office-software market--hardly an insignificant chunk.
     
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Nov 21, 2006
    #13
  14. Max Burke

    Who Am I Guest

    Re: MS Windows the cheaper option: City Council pulled the plug on its £535,000 Linux open-source pilot

    In article <ejtqq7$e7l$>,
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <_zealand> wrote:

    > In message <>, Who Am I
    > wrote:
    >
    > > Linux to me is only useful if you neglect to account for your time.

    >
    > The idea that staying with Dimdows and Microsoft Office means no time cost
    > is a myth. Look at this item
    > <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6165124.stm> about the prospects for
    > users upgrading to Office 2007--there're going to be major retraining costs
    > and time involved. Also note that OpenOffice has already got 10% of the
    > total office-software market--hardly an insignificant chunk.


    I had never said I was a windows user either....
     
    Who Am I, Nov 22, 2006
    #14
  15. Max Burke

    Who Am I Guest

    In article <>,
    Chris Hope <> wrote:

    > Who Am I wrote:
    >
    > > In article <>,
    > > Chris Hope <> wrote:

    >
    > > And there lies the crux of the matter, it is cheaper time wise to use
    > > XP on these machine as that is also what their customers are used to,
    > > therefore there are zero retraining costs associated with it.

    >
    > Fair comments. Of course, it all depends what you're used to using.


    Exactly. I always try to match the OS to the users best needs. I am a
    Mac User but I do run XP under Parallels (Equiv to VMWare) so that I can
    use Protel for PCB design. However I have people using Macs,
    Windows,Linux though I fob the support of linux/windows onto someone
    else, I have enough Macs to keep me busy 1-2 hours a week (over 100) and
    that means I can do something interesting.

    >
    > For me, it would be faster to install a desktop using Linux than
    > Windows, simply because a) I know what I'm doing when it comes to Linux
    > and b) it installs almost all the software I need in the 30 minutes or
    > so it takes to run the installer. After installing XP I still need to
    > install all the software I need, like an office suite etc. In both
    > cases I'm going to mess around after the install getting the desktop
    > working the way I want it.


    Exactly, for YOU. Too many people from all the OS camps are so anal
    about what they use they are unable to comprehend that others needs and
    preferences are different.
    >
    > For other people, moving from Windows to Linux, or Windows to Mac or
    > whatever else, is more difficult because they don't know where to find
    > everything and the way the GUI works is a little different between each
    > OS. Also it can be trickier getting some hardware to work on different
    > operating systems. For a lot of people it's more or less impossible to
    > even think about installing an OS... fortunately for them, PCs come
    > preinstalled :) and unfortunately for some of us they have children who
    > end up having to support them ;p


    Mac OSX comes preinstalled too. Macs have had the OS preinstalled for
    almost 20 years.

    >
    > I still believe Linux has a long way to go but it's getting there as
    > more hardware vendors start making drivers etc for Linux.


    Yes, but I do not see linux becoming a replacement for Macs/Windows
     
    Who Am I, Nov 22, 2006
    #15
  16. Re: MS Windows the cheaper option: Not!

    Here's somebody else who IS switching to Linux:
    <http://theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=35994>.
     
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Nov 28, 2006
    #16
  17. Max Burke

    Who Am I Guest

    Re: MS Windows the cheaper option: Not!

    In article <ekg4g0$k30$>,
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <_zealand> wrote:

    > Here's somebody else who IS switching to Linux:
    > <http://theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=35994>.


    So ?
     
    Who Am I, Nov 28, 2006
    #17
  18. Max Burke

    cyril Guest

    Re: MS Windows the cheaper option: Not!

    All sounds bunk to me, PC's for Library applications, lets see, Browser
    for general internet access and presumably some Librarian database
    application that is most likely (or should be) HTTP based, and perhaps
    printing access.

    Assuming it is a HTTP based database then wheres the cost differenc
    eitherway?

    So where is the money, you cant spend that much money eitherway Linux
    or MS for a basic PC that has a tied down (ie content restricted )
    browser.

    Seems its just incompentent financials and project managment that
    killed this one.

    by the way I sit at four pcs in my office, two MS, two Linux, both have
    there positives, not to sure which has more, depends on the day Im
    having.

    Cyril
     
    cyril, Nov 28, 2006
    #18
  19. Max Burke

    Fred Dagg Guest

    Re: MS Windows the cheaper option: Not!

    On Tue, 28 Nov 2006 14:49:00 +1300, Lawrence D'Oliveiro
    <_zealand> exclaimed:

    >Here's somebody else who IS switching to Linux:
    ><http://theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=35994>.


    Wow, someone switches to Linux and it makes front page news?

    Your desperation is showing.
     
    Fred Dagg, Nov 28, 2006
    #19
  20. Max Burke

    Fred Dagg Guest

    Re: MS Windows the cheaper option: Not!

    On 27 Nov 2006 19:31:20 -0800, "cyril" <>
    exclaimed:

    >
    >by the way I sit at four pcs in my office, two MS, two Linux, both have
    >there positives, not to sure which has more, depends on the day Im
    >having.


    Most people that actually use both say the same thing, but try telling
    the Zealots (that have either not used Windows for years, or don't
    know anything about Linux).
     
    Fred Dagg, Nov 28, 2006
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Harv
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    7,338
  2. Paul D. Sullivan
    Replies:
    89
    Views:
    1,730
    John Turco
    May 30, 2007
  3. Knut Arvid Keilen

    I offer you 300.000.000.000 NOK by law. Who is the bidder?

    Knut Arvid Keilen, Dec 13, 2007, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    512
    Moldy Cheese
    Dec 13, 2007
  4. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Manawatu-Wanganui Regional Council Adopts Open Source

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Jan 26, 2010, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    400
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro
    Feb 4, 2010
  5. softnfurry
    Replies:
    27
    Views:
    692
    duckstandard
    Mar 1, 2010
Loading...

Share This Page