NZ Govt does Open Source software deal with Novell.....

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by steve, Oct 20, 2005.

  1. steve

    steve Guest

    Forgive the information being in a Green Party press release. I haven't seen
    it anywhere else so far.

    **************************************************************************

    Govt software deal great news for Open Source cause in NZ

    The deal that has cleared the path for government agencies to adopt and
    expand their use of non-proprietary software is great news for the Open
    Source cause in New Zealand, Green Party IT Spokesperson Metiria Turei
    says.

    The Inland Revenue Department has signed an all-of-government license
    agreement with Novell that will give government agencies greater freedom in
    their choice of software and provide a framework for those that opt for
    Open Source.

    ?Clearly much will be made of the money that can be saved by moving away
    from inflexible licensing requirements, but, IMHO, the most important part
    of this deal is the opportunity for agencies to embrace the increased
    reliability, security and flexibility of Open Source,? Mrs Turei says.

    ?In turn, the economy of scale and credibility provided by the Government
    choosing Open Source should go some way to increasing its use in New
    Zealand generally, which in turn will start to roll back the
    virus-vulnerable Microsoft monoculture on Kiwi desktops.

    ?Also, Government has a democratic duty to provide information to the public
    that is in an accessible and open format. With Open Source software, no
    multinational company can limit what can be accessed and what is done with
    information.?

    The State Services Commission has also welcomed the deal, saying it will
    allow ?robust competition in the government software market?. On that
    count, Mrs Turei is not so sure.

    ??Robust? competition does not inevitably lead to the best outcome in an
    area such as this because multiple suppliers and standards often lead to
    wasteful duplication.

    ?The Government should select a range of preferred Open Source options, with
    some choice in each area, and then support ?Buy Kiwi Made? by having them
    maintained by New Zealand programmers. This would be great for Kiwi
    businesses while also providing flexibility and security for government
    agencies,? Mrs Turei says.

    (FYI, this release was prepared and distributed with proprietary products
    because the Parliamentary Service is yet to go Open Source.)
     
    steve, Oct 20, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. steve

    Not Dave Guest

    On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 11:25:20 +1300, steve <>
    growled these words from under a rock:

    >
    >?Clearly much will be made of the money that can be saved by moving away
    >from inflexible licensing requirements, but, IMHO, the most important part
    >of this deal is the opportunity for agencies to embrace the increased
    >reliability, security and flexibility of Open Source,? Mrs Turei says.
    >
    >?In turn, the economy of scale and credibility provided by the Government
    >choosing Open Source should go some way to increasing its use in New
    >Zealand generally, which in turn will start to roll back the
    >virus-vulnerable Microsoft monoculture on Kiwi desktops.
    >
    >?Also, Government has a democratic duty to provide information to the public
    >that is in an accessible and open format. With Open Source software, no
    >multinational company can limit what can be accessed and what is done with
    >information.?


    What a nutter! An absolute and complete waste of money, and a fine
    example of why the greens should be nowhere near government. It really
    doesn't matter who the supplier is, these insults and attacks against
    a major government supplier can only result in a negative outcome.

    Ok, it's official. Bling-Bling is actually Metiria Turei!!
     
    Not Dave, Oct 21, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. steve

    steve Guest

    Not Dave wrote:

    > On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 11:25:20 +1300, steve <>
    > growled these words from under a rock:
    >
    >>
    >>?Clearly much will be made of the money that can be saved by moving away
    >>from inflexible licensing requirements, but, IMHO, the most important part
    >>of this deal is the opportunity for agencies to embrace the increased
    >>reliability, security and flexibility of Open Source,? Mrs Turei says.
    >>
    >>?In turn, the economy of scale and credibility provided by the Government
    >>choosing Open Source should go some way to increasing its use in New
    >>Zealand generally, which in turn will start to roll back the
    >>virus-vulnerable Microsoft monoculture on Kiwi desktops.
    >>
    >>?Also, Government has a democratic duty to provide information to the
    >>public that is in an accessible and open format. With Open Source
    >>software, no multinational company can limit what can be accessed and what
    >>is done with information.?

    >
    > What a nutter!


    Nuts to say government information should be supplied in non-proprietary
    formats?

    I disagree....and many other people will, too.

    Describing them as "nuts" is more than a little desperate...and doesn't even
    vaguesly resemble a reasoned case in support of closed, owned document
    formats for public information.

    > An absolute and complete waste of money, and a fine
    > example of why the greens should be nowhere near government. It really
    > doesn't matter who the supplier is, these insults and attacks against
    > a major government supplier can only result in a negative outcome.
    >
    > Ok, it's official. Bling-Bling is actually Metiria Turei!!


    Come back when you have something resembling a reasoned argument in favour
    of closed, proprietary data forms for dissemination of public information.

    Take all the time you need.
     
    steve, Oct 21, 2005
    #3
  4. steve

    Not Dave Guest

    On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 12:32:11 +1300, steve <>
    growled these words from under a rock:

    >>>?Clearly much will be made of the money that can be saved by moving away
    >>>from inflexible licensing requirements, but, IMHO, the most important part
    >>>of this deal is the opportunity for agencies to embrace the increased
    >>>reliability, security and flexibility of Open Source,? Mrs Turei says.
    >>>
    >>>?In turn, the economy of scale and credibility provided by the Government
    >>>choosing Open Source should go some way to increasing its use in New
    >>>Zealand generally, which in turn will start to roll back the
    >>>virus-vulnerable Microsoft monoculture on Kiwi desktops.
    >>>
    >>>?Also, Government has a democratic duty to provide information to the
    >>>public that is in an accessible and open format. With Open Source
    >>>software, no multinational company can limit what can be accessed and what
    >>>is done with information.?

    >>
    >> What a nutter!

    >
    >Nuts to say government information should be supplied in non-proprietary
    >formats?
    >
    >I disagree....and many other people will, too.


    No, there is something to be said for that.

    Nuts to use quotes like "inflexible", "increased reliability, security
    and flexibility of Open Source", "credibility [from] choosing Open
    Source", "virus-vulnerable Microsoft monoculture", and carrying on
    about multinationals limiting what can be accessed!!!

    What a joke.

    The "press release" is the ramblings of a typical OS fanatic who has
    no idea what they are talking about.

    No wonder you posted it.
     
    Not Dave, Oct 21, 2005
    #4
  5. steve

    Rob J Guest

    In article <>,
    says...
    > Forgive the information being in a Green Party press release. I haven't seen
    > it anywhere else so far.
    >
    > **************************************************************************
    >
    > Govt software deal great news for Open Source cause in NZ
    >
    > The deal that has cleared the path for government agencies to adopt and
    > expand their use of non-proprietary software is great news for the Open
    > Source cause in New Zealand, Green Party IT Spokesperson Metiria Turei
    > says.
    >
    > The Inland Revenue Department has signed an all-of-government license
    > agreement with Novell that will give government agencies greater freedom in
    > their choice of software and provide a framework for those that opt for
    > Open Source.


    Exaggerated. Novell is not an OSS company, they have closed source
    products even on Linux.

    > ?Clearly much will be made of the money that can be saved by moving away
    > from inflexible licensing requirements, but, IMHO, the most important part
    > of this deal is the opportunity for agencies to embrace the increased
    > reliability, security and flexibility of Open Source,? Mrs Turei says.


    FUD.

    > ?In turn, the economy of scale and credibility provided by the Government
    > choosing Open Source should go some way to increasing its use in New
    > Zealand generally, which in turn will start to roll back the
    > virus-vulnerable Microsoft monoculture on Kiwi desktops.


    Prejudice and loathing. Anti capitalist nonsense.

    > The State Services Commission has also welcomed the deal, saying it will
    > allow ?robust competition in the government software market?. On that
    > count, Mrs Turei is not so sure.


    Commonsense at last. There is not actually a premise for "OSS is
    better" automatically.

    > ??Robust? competition does not inevitably lead to the best outcome in an
    > area such as this because multiple suppliers and standards often lead to
    > wasteful duplication.
    >
    > ?The Government should select a range of preferred Open Source options, with
    > some choice in each area, and then support ?Buy Kiwi Made? by having them
    > maintained by New Zealand programmers. This would be great for Kiwi
    > businesses while also providing flexibility and security for government
    > agencies,? Mrs Turei says.


    Name which current OSS projects are indigenous? Why should OSS be any
    different in commercial development from other types of software?

    I presume you are talking about commercial development, not some group
    of part time geeks.


    > (FYI, this release was prepared and distributed with proprietary products
    > because the Parliamentary Service is yet to go Open Source.)


    Hope they keep you waiting a long long time...
     
    Rob J, Oct 21, 2005
    #5
  6. steve

    Rob J Guest

    In article <>,
    says...
    > Not Dave wrote:
    >
    > > On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 11:25:20 +1300, steve <>
    > > growled these words from under a rock:
    > >
    > >>
    > >>?Clearly much will be made of the money that can be saved by moving away
    > >>from inflexible licensing requirements, but, IMHO, the most important part
    > >>of this deal is the opportunity for agencies to embrace the increased
    > >>reliability, security and flexibility of Open Source,? Mrs Turei says.
    > >>
    > >>?In turn, the economy of scale and credibility provided by the Government
    > >>choosing Open Source should go some way to increasing its use in New
    > >>Zealand generally, which in turn will start to roll back the
    > >>virus-vulnerable Microsoft monoculture on Kiwi desktops.
    > >>
    > >>?Also, Government has a democratic duty to provide information to the
    > >>public that is in an accessible and open format. With Open Source
    > >>software, no multinational company can limit what can be accessed and what
    > >>is done with information.?

    > >
    > > What a nutter!

    >
    > Nuts to say government information should be supplied in non-proprietary
    > formats?


    Name such a format that is useful (PDF is a proprietary format).
     
    Rob J, Oct 21, 2005
    #6
  7. steve

    Bruce Hoult Guest

    In article <>,
    Rob J <> wrote:

    > > Nuts to say government information should be supplied in non-proprietary
    > > formats?

    >
    > Name such a format that is useful (PDF is a proprietary format).


    It is true that PDF was developed by a commercial company which provides
    products based around it, but the specification is open and published
    and anyone is free to write programs that produce or display PDF. I've
    written programs that produce PDF documents myself, and there are very
    good open-source PDF viewers in e.g. KDE.

    Apple based the entire display and printing architecture of OSX on PDF,
    and implemented it themselves -- not because they were buddies with
    Adobe but because Adobe wanted too much money to license Display
    PostScript (as previously used by NeXT) compared to the price Apple
    wanted to be able to sell OSX for.

    --
    Bruce | 41.1670S | \ spoken | -+-
    Hoult | 174.8263E | /\ here. | ----------O----------
     
    Bruce Hoult, Oct 21, 2005
    #7
  8. steve

    Rob J Guest

    In article <>,
    says...
    > In article <>,
    > Rob J <> wrote:
    >
    > > > Nuts to say government information should be supplied in non-proprietary
    > > > formats?

    > >
    > > Name such a format that is useful (PDF is a proprietary format).

    >
    > It is true that PDF was developed by a commercial company which provides
    > products based around it, but the specification is open and published
    > and anyone is free to write programs that produce or display PDF. I've
    > written programs that produce PDF documents myself, and there are very
    > good open-source PDF viewers in e.g. KDE.


    There is already CSS that produces PDF so you don't need to change all
    your platforms and applications to produce PDF documents.

    >
     
    Rob J, Oct 21, 2005
    #8
  9. T'was the Fri, 21 Oct 2005 11:25:20 +1300 when I remembered steve
    <> saying something like this:

    >?Also, Government has a democratic duty to provide information to the public
    >that is in an accessible and open format. With Open Source software, no
    >multinational company can limit what can be accessed and what is done with
    >information.?


    I probably tend to agree with the idea of having information from the
    government in an open format, such as XHTML or the like.
    --
    Cheers,

    Waylon Kenning.
     
    Waylon Kenning, Oct 21, 2005
    #9
  10. steve

    thingy Guest

    Not Dave wrote:
    > On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 11:25:20 +1300, steve <>
    > growled these words from under a rock:
    >
    >
    >>?Clearly much will be made of the money that can be saved by moving away

    >
    >>from inflexible licensing requirements, but, IMHO, the most important part

    >
    >>of this deal is the opportunity for agencies to embrace the increased
    >>reliability, security and flexibility of Open Source,? Mrs Turei says.
    >>
    >>?In turn, the economy of scale and credibility provided by the Government
    >>choosing Open Source should go some way to increasing its use in New
    >>Zealand generally, which in turn will start to roll back the
    >>virus-vulnerable Microsoft monoculture on Kiwi desktops.
    >>
    >>?Also, Government has a democratic duty to provide information to the public
    >>that is in an accessible and open format. With Open Source software, no
    >>multinational company can limit what can be accessed and what is done with
    >>information.?

    >
    >
    > What a nutter! An absolute and complete waste of money, and a fine
    > example of why the greens should be nowhere near government. It really
    > doesn't matter who the supplier is, these insults and attacks against
    > a major government supplier can only result in a negative outcome.


    uh......nutter no, some common sense. It does matter when the supplier
    sells a virus vunerable system, and it is artificially difficult for the
    user to move, MS has a lot to answer for in that respect.

    Opening up to competition is rarely bad, the only negative competition I
    can see is less of a need for Microsoft clones etc. if that is going to
    effect your employment prospects well tough....if it cuts NZers taxes
    that is good.

    > Ok, it's official. Bling-Bling is actually Metiria Turei!!


    Provided the storage format is an open standard like open document, I
    quite agree the supplier does not matter....

    regards

    Thing
     
    thingy, Oct 21, 2005
    #10
  11. steve

    thingy Guest

    Not Dave wrote:
    > On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 12:32:11 +1300, steve <>
    > growled these words from under a rock:
    >
    >
    >>>>?Clearly much will be made of the money that can be saved by moving away
    >>>
    >>>>from inflexible licensing requirements, but, IMHO, the most important part
    >>>
    >>>>of this deal is the opportunity for agencies to embrace the increased
    >>>>reliability, security and flexibility of Open Source,? Mrs Turei says.
    >>>>
    >>>>?In turn, the economy of scale and credibility provided by the Government
    >>>>choosing Open Source should go some way to increasing its use in New
    >>>>Zealand generally, which in turn will start to roll back the
    >>>>virus-vulnerable Microsoft monoculture on Kiwi desktops.
    >>>>
    >>>>?Also, Government has a democratic duty to provide information to the
    >>>>public that is in an accessible and open format. With Open Source
    >>>>software, no multinational company can limit what can be accessed and what
    >>>>is done with information.?
    >>>
    >>>What a nutter!

    >>
    >>Nuts to say government information should be supplied in non-
    >>formats?
    >>
    >>I disagree....and many other people will, too.

    >
    >
    > No, there is something to be said for that.
    >
    > Nuts to use quotes like "inflexible", "increased reliability, security
    > and flexibility of Open Source", "credibility [from] choosing Open
    > Source", "virus-vulnerable Microsoft monoculture", and carrying on
    > about multinationals limiting what can be accessed!!!
    >
    > What a joke.


    You means we dont fall for MS's bought tests and papers put out as fact
    just because you do?

    > The "press release" is the ramblings of a typical OS fanatic who has
    > no idea what they are talking about.


    Seemed to make sense to me.

    > No wonder you posted it.


    Government documents should never be stored or provided in a proprietary
    format....

    I can see you are a MS fanatic, they would seem more numerious and even
    more fanatical than the OSS kind, I have found, desperation I suspect.

    regards

    Thing
     
    thingy, Oct 21, 2005
    #11
  12. steve

    thingy Guest

    Rob J wrote:
    > In article <>,
    > says...
    >
    >>Forgive the information being in a Green Party press release. I haven't seen
    >>it anywhere else so far.
    >>
    >>**************************************************************************
    >>
    >>Govt software deal great news for Open Source cause in NZ
    >>
    >>The deal that has cleared the path for government agencies to adopt and
    >>expand their use of non-proprietary software is great news for the Open
    >>Source cause in New Zealand, Green Party IT Spokesperson Metiria Turei
    >>says.
    >>
    >>The Inland Revenue Department has signed an all-of-government license
    >>agreement with Novell that will give government agencies greater freedom in
    >>their choice of software and provide a framework for those that opt for
    >>Open Source.

    >
    >
    > Exaggerated. Novell is not an OSS company, they have closed source
    > products even on Linux.


    Correct, in fact effectively all of Novell's products are more closed
    source than any other Linux Distro.

    >>?Clearly much will be made of the money that can be saved by moving away
    >>from inflexible licensing requirements, but, IMHO, the most important part
    >>of this deal is the opportunity for agencies to embrace the increased
    >>reliability, security and flexibility of Open Source,? Mrs Turei says.

    >
    >
    > FUD.


    Quite a bit of fact actually.

    >>?In turn, the economy of scale and credibility provided by the Government
    >>choosing Open Source should go some way to increasing its use in New
    >>Zealand generally, which in turn will start to roll back the
    >>virus-vulnerable Microsoft monoculture on Kiwi desktops.

    >
    >
    > Prejudice and loathing. Anti capitalist nonsense.


    yeah right......this is old FUD....looks like you are stuck in 2002 or
    something.

    >>The State Services Commission has also welcomed the deal, saying it will
    >>allow ?robust competition in the government software market?. On that
    >>count, Mrs Turei is not so sure.

    >
    >
    > Commonsense at last. There is not actually a premise for "OSS is
    > better" automatically.
    >
    >
    >>??Robust? competition does not inevitably lead to the best outcome in an
    >>area such as this because multiple suppliers and standards often lead to
    >>wasteful duplication.
    >>
    >>?The Government should select a range of preferred Open Source options, with
    >>some choice in each area, and then support ?Buy Kiwi Made? by having them
    >>maintained by New Zealand programmers. This would be great for Kiwi
    >>businesses while also providing flexibility and security for government
    >>agencies,? Mrs Turei says.

    >
    >
    > Name which current OSS projects are indigenous? Why should OSS be any
    > different in commercial development from other types of software?


    Mailwasher for one, there is a library system as well put out by katipo
    I think, so at least 2.

    > I presume you are talking about commercial development, not some group
    > of part time geeks.


    Shows how little you understand OSS, just carry on, it will be your
    demise....

    >>(FYI, this release was prepared and distributed with proprietary products
    >>because the Parliamentary Service is yet to go Open Source.)

    >
    >
    > Hope they keep you waiting a long long time...
    >


    Dont bet on it.

    regards

    Thing
     
    thingy, Oct 21, 2005
    #12
  13. On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 13:13:57 +1300, someone purporting to be Not Dave
    didst scrawl:

    > On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 11:25:20 +1300, steve <>
    > growled these words from under a rock:

    *SNIP*
    > What a nutter! An absolute and complete waste of money, and a fine
    > example of why the greens should be nowhere near government. It really
    > doesn't matter who the supplier is, these insults and attacks against
    > a major government supplier can only result in a negative outcome.
    >

    *SNIP*

    Actually it matters a great deal. As the Commonwealth of Massachusetts has
    determined, it's entirely unacceptable to use proprietary formats for
    public data. Any barrier to access is an imposition on the democratic
    process.
    It's gratifying to see so many Government documents coming out in PDF, but
    there are still far too many that are presented in .doc or .xls.
    Since Microsoft have confirmed their determination to lock the world into
    their document formats, the only possible course of action is to ditch
    their products and move to OOo.

    --
    Matthew Poole
    "Don't use force. Get a bigger hammer."
     
    Matthew Poole, Oct 21, 2005
    #13
  14. steve

    steve Guest

    Not Dave wrote:

    > On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 12:32:11 +1300, steve <>
    > growled these words from under a rock:
    >
    >>>>?Clearly much will be made of the money that can be saved by moving away
    >>>>from inflexible licensing requirements, but, IMHO, the most important
    >>>>part of this deal is the opportunity for agencies to embrace the
    >>>>increased reliability, security and flexibility of Open Source,? Mrs
    >>>>Turei says.
    >>>>
    >>>>?In turn, the economy of scale and credibility provided by the
    >>>>Government choosing Open Source should go some way to increasing its use
    >>>>in New Zealand generally, which in turn will start to roll back the
    >>>>virus-vulnerable Microsoft monoculture on Kiwi desktops.
    >>>>
    >>>>?Also, Government has a democratic duty to provide information to the
    >>>>public that is in an accessible and open format. With Open Source
    >>>>software, no multinational company can limit what can be accessed and
    >>>>what is done with information.?
    >>>
    >>> What a nutter!

    >>
    >>Nuts to say government information should be supplied in non-proprietary
    >>formats?
    >>
    >>I disagree....and many other people will, too.

    >
    > No, there is something to be said for that.
    >
    > Nuts to use quotes like "inflexible", "increased reliability, security
    > and flexibility of Open Source", "credibility [from] choosing Open
    > Source", "virus-vulnerable Microsoft monoculture", and carrying on
    > about multinationals limiting what can be accessed!!!


    All of that is at least debatably true.

    Certainly, OSS - particularly the OS - *is* more flexible than closed-source
    software from the point of view of the would-be user because the user can
    change it or pay someone to change it.

    Have you checked out how many different, purpose-built versions of Linux
    there are? Literally hundreds - for use as Personal video recorders,
    routers, servers, desktops.....and many, many other things besides.

    > What a joke.


    I don't see why you're so upset.

    > The "press release" is the ramblings of a typical OS fanatic who has
    > no idea what they are talking about.


    Say what you like....all the claims made do have some verifiable truth in
    them and can be readily debated.

    > No wonder you posted it.


    I posted it because the government has approved OSS from Novell for purchase
    by government departments.

    The VERY FIRST LINES were an apology that it was in the form of a Green
    Party press release....as I had not seen it anywhere else.

    Your hysterical reaction is completely out of proportion to the post.

    Debate the points made, if you like. That would be a more effective
    response.
     
    steve, Oct 21, 2005
    #14
  15. steve

    steve Guest

    Rob J wrote:


    > Name such a format that is useful (PDF is a proprietary format).


    PDF is now an open spec, Rob J.

    Anyone can write a program that reads or writes PDFs.

    I use such programs in Linux all the time.
     
    steve, Oct 21, 2005
    #15
  16. steve

    steve Guest

    Rob J wrote:

    > In article <>,
    > says...
    >> In article <>,
    >> Rob J <> wrote:
    >>
    >> > > Nuts to say government information should be supplied in
    >> > > non-proprietary formats?
    >> >
    >> > Name such a format that is useful (PDF is a proprietary format).

    >>
    >> It is true that PDF was developed by a commercial company which provides
    >> products based around it, but the specification is open and published
    >> and anyone is free to write programs that produce or display PDF. I've
    >> written programs that produce PDF documents myself, and there are very
    >> good open-source PDF viewers in e.g. KDE.

    >
    > There is already CSS that produces PDF so you don't need to change all
    > your platforms and applications to produce PDF documents.


    You do if you don't want to buy closed source software or be bound by
    arbitrary license restrictions imposed by a single vendor.

    Like....freely redistributing a modified version with new or additional
    functionality that YOU wrote.

    Not possible with most CSS. You don't have the source and you can't freely
    redistribute a modified version should you wish to.

    In the US, even reverse-engineering the closed source software and
    re-creating it is illegal and the penalties are very harsh. You get less
    jail time for killing someone.

    That alone is more than enough to make closed source software unattractive
    to anyone who isn't happy with what's on offer.

    You might not be able to imagine why anyone would.....but that doesn't mean
    no one would.
     
    steve, Oct 21, 2005
    #16
  17. steve

    Bling Bling Guest

    On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 17:29:52 +1300, thingy wrote:

    > Provided the storage format is an open standard like open document, I
    > quite agree the supplier does not matter....


    I too would agree with that.


    Bling Bling

    --
    Pamela Jones: "Linux will continue to grow, and open formats and standards
    will continue to be adopted in part because we don't trust Microsoft."
     
    Bling Bling, Oct 21, 2005
    #17
  18. steve

    thingy Guest

    steve wrote:
    > Forgive the information being in a Green Party press release. I haven't seen
    > it anywhere else so far.
    >
    > **************************************************************************
    >
    > Govt software deal great news for Open Source cause in NZ
    >
    > The deal that has cleared the path for government agencies to adopt and
    > expand their use of non-proprietary software is great news for the Open
    > Source cause in New Zealand, Green Party IT Spokesperson Metiria Turei
    > says.


    Hopeful, but the incumbent is MS and the biggest supplier is EDS and
    effectively all MS, the next biggest companies are Gen-i, Computerland,
    datacom, Axon, Eagle all MS centric .

    > The Inland Revenue Department has signed an all-of-government license
    > agreement with Novell that will give government agencies greater freedom in
    > their choice of software and provide a framework for those that opt for
    > Open Source.
    >
    > ?Clearly much will be made of the money that can be saved by moving away
    > from inflexible licensing requirements, but, IMHO, the most important part
    > of this deal is the opportunity for agencies to embrace the increased
    > reliability, security and flexibility of Open Source,? Mrs Turei says.


    Ms is quite flexible in its requirements, I wouldnt think them any worse
    than Novell.

    > ?In turn, the economy of scale and credibility provided by the Government
    > choosing Open Source should go some way to increasing its use in New
    > Zealand generally,


    Yes I agree.

    which in turn will start to roll back the
    > virus-vulnerable Microsoft monoculture on Kiwi desktops.


    Not sure if this is that relevent myself.

    > ?Also, Government has a democratic duty to provide information to the public
    > that is in an accessible and open format. With Open Source software, no
    > multinational company can limit what can be accessed and what is done with
    > information.?


    I think she needs to understand that she has mixed two issues here. Open
    documents and open standards and free access to government is very
    important for democracy. Using "open source software" does not
    guarantee open format documents.

    > The State Services Commission has also welcomed the deal, saying it will
    > allow ?robust competition in the government software market?. On that
    > count, Mrs Turei is not so sure.


    There is every evidence it will help, just how level that will be in
    reality remains to be seen.

    > ??Robust? competition does not inevitably lead to the best outcome in an
    > area such as this because multiple suppliers and standards often lead to
    > wasteful duplication.


    This is historic think, vendor land where each OS vendor was total lock
    in. If you have multiple standards, yes, wasteful, if you have open
    standards and keep them that way, less so, Linux and OSS can give you
    this with care. I visited enough Governemnt agencies, departments and
    public services to see lots of single vendor boxes doing one thing
    because it was cheaper do buy an alternative to what they already had as
    the encumbent vendor tried to screw them over, severely.....Using OS
    with care means this will not happen, using Novell will probably prove
    little better than MS I suspect.

    > ?The Government should select a range of preferred Open Source options, with
    > some choice in each area, and then support ?Buy Kiwi Made? by having them
    > maintained by New Zealand programmers. This would be great for Kiwi
    > businesses while also providing flexibility and security for government
    > agencies,? Mrs Turei says.


    This is taking buy kiwi a bit far IMHO, dogma and ideaology getting in
    the way of practicality. Though several other countires have decided not
    paying the MS tax will develope their own IT industry, NZ maybe better
    keeping a foot in multiple camps.

    > (FYI, this release was prepared and distributed with proprietary products
    > because the Parliamentary Service is yet to go Open Source.)


    Nor should it necessarily be, just open standard.

    regards

    Thing
     
    thingy, Oct 21, 2005
    #18
  19. steve

    Bling Bling Guest

    On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 19:08:25 +1300, thingy wrote:

    >> The deal that has cleared the path for government agencies to adopt and
    >> expand their use of non-proprietary software is great news for the Open
    >> Source cause in New Zealand, Green Party IT Spokesperson Metiria Turei
    >> says.

    >
    > Hopeful, but the incumbent is MS and the biggest supplier is EDS and
    > effectively all MS, the next biggest companies are Gen-i, Computerland,
    > datacom, Axon, Eagle all MS centric .


    So they'll have to upgrade their knowledge base to include more than
    merely Micro$oft.

    Actually, I have the impression that some of those outfits are in the
    process of doing that.


    Bling Bling

    --
    Pamela Jones: "Linux will continue to grow, and open formats and standards
    will continue to be adopted in part because we don't trust Microsoft."
     
    Bling Bling, Oct 21, 2005
    #19
  20. steve

    Peter Guest

    steve wrote:

    > The Inland Revenue Department has signed an all-of-government license
    > agreement with Novell that will give government agencies greater freedom
    > in their choice of software and provide a framework for those that opt for
    > Open Source.


    Oh no - Microsoft will never stand for this. The last thing they want is
    for users to have freedom of choice. MS abhors the free market (as
    evidenced by their anti-competitive contracts with OEMs, the unlawful
    monopoly abuse, the deliberate departure from format standards, etc).


    Peter
     
    Peter, Oct 21, 2005
    #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. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Open-Source Good, Closed-Source Bad

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Oct 16, 2005, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    485
    Gordon
    Oct 16, 2005
  2. Have A Nice Cup of Tea

    Novell stitches up Linux deal with NSW Government

    Have A Nice Cup of Tea, Mar 8, 2006, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    303
    Have A Nice Cup of Tea
    Mar 8, 2006
  3. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Closed-Source vs Open-Source Drivers

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, May 4, 2009, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    525
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro
    May 5, 2009
  4. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Open Source vs Closed Source Security

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Mar 3, 2010, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    1,000
    Gordon
    Mar 4, 2010
  5. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    NZ Govt Use Of Open Source

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Sep 13, 2010, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    306
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro
    Sep 13, 2010
Loading...

Share This Page