Adding to Mekkawy, we must also ensure that any updates and/or modifications do not greatly affect the user experience (for obvious reasons), that's why we need to put in mind that any UI that we will agree on will have to stay like it is for 3-4 years, even if the OS itself got updated (which means if we choose lxde for example we might have to stick to a specific version number for good).
We should also create a mechanism to monitor these computers or managing them remotely for IT departments; consider a different distro. Dr. Hefnawy is right, we should start with organizations and use them as case studies to lobby for bigger phases. On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 9:33 PM, Ahmed ElHefnawy <[email protected]>wrote: > I suggest that a phased approach to be followed, an organization, a > ministry, and then government. I suggest we start with organization of > educational buildings abnya tal3mia, then ministry of education, then > government. First phase 3 years, second 5 years, third 7 years. Many > reasons lie behind such a recommendation. I cannot write more at the > moment. > Best, > Ahmed > On Aug 25, 2012 8:29 PM, "Ahmed Mekkawy" <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> ** I agree. What I meant by not offering more value than debian was >> about the OS itself. Ofcourse the training materials are a plus. I do >> believe that some big entity as a government needs to create its own >> training certificate, just like what malysia did. >> >> * Desktop distro: >> First I see that it should be a matching distro as the server one, which >> means fedora (or something based on it) if we choose redhat, or something >> based on debian if we choose debian/ubuntu. >> >> As we have a very large number of distros, let me summerize from my POV >> what we need for the distro: >> >> - to be light: we got lots of outdated hardware in the government. We >> need to use it and bring it back to live. Less hardware specs means less >> cost and less hardware upgrades. I suggest we drop any distro that is based >> on KDE, gnome, or unity. I suggest xfce, lxde, or something like that. >> - ease of use: and hopefully if it looks like windows XP. Yes this what >> we unfortunately need. >> - important updates rate: we need low volume of updates, most >> governmental agencies have very limited bandwidth. >> - depending mainly on GUI and the CLI intervention should be relatively >> minimal. >> >> This is what I got in mind till now. >> >> Thanks, >> Ahmed >> -- >> Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. >> >> "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> I totally agree, Debian is my personal favorite as well. But to be >>> objective, Ubuntu has the advantage of having some training material and >>> courses from Canonical, and does not require being tied to another company, >>> so you can get the training, and save the updates subscription fees. >>> >>> ----------------------* >>> Mosab Ahmad * >>> Entrepreneur in the make >>> >>> Cell : +201119942443 >>> E-mail : [email protected] >>> LinkedIn : http://www.linkedin.com/in/mosab >>> github : https://github.com/mos3abof >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 2:56 PM, Ahmed Mekkawy < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi All, >>>> >>>> When I talked about standerdizing a distro to suggest for the >>>> engineering syndicate issue, some guys suggested others. So I thought about >>>> opening this thread to say why did I choose it and discuss the >>>> alternatives. I'm sending this from my mobile so please execuse my previty. >>>> >>>> * Server distro: >>>> I guess the real alternatives we got is redhat, centos, ubuntu and >>>> debian. Let me summerize shortly my openion on each of them: >>>> - redhat: technically competing. The good thing is clear training >>>> pathes. But on the other hand I don't believe we need to be tied to another >>>> american company. Paying monthly subscriptions for all the government >>>> servers as long as paying for training all the staff is not a pleasant idea >>>> for me. Remember that the syndicate project title is technological >>>> independance. >>>> - centos: I don't believe that centos is good enough for governmental >>>> servers. Enough that the security updates are too slow which could cause >>>> disasters. >>>> - debian: this is my personal choice, technically competing, excellent >>>> security updates, very stable. And best of all, it is an independant, very >>>> large, and very distributed contributers group which ensures we don't be >>>> dependant on a certain company or even country. >>>> - ubuntu: from my POV, ubuntu server doesn't give any real value more >>>> than debian. Except being dependant on a company instead of contributer >>>> group. This can be better in some aspects like having official support. But >>>> I believe we don't really need that. >>>> >>>> Will send another email for desktop distros >>>> -- >>>> Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. >>> >>> >>>
